Holding

Section 14 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 applies only to employees whose minimum rate of wages is fixed under the Act, and therefore does not extend to municipal employees drawing higher wages under separate service rules.

Summary

The Moharrirs/peons of Municipal Council Hatta filed an application under Section 22 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 seeking overtime pay for four extra hours worked daily during February‑March 1982‑83. The Labour Court allowed the application, but the High Court dismissed the Municipal Council's petition. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether Section 14 of the Minimum Wages Act, which provides for overtime, applies to employees whose wages are fixed under the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Services (Scales of Pay and Allowances) Rules, 1967 and are higher than the statutory minimum. The Court held that Section 14 is limited to employees whose minimum rate of wages is fixed under the Act; those receiving higher wages under separate service rules are excluded. Consequently, the respondents' claim for overtime under the Act was deemed misconceived, and the appeal was allowed, setting aside the lower courts' orders.

Issues considered

Whether Section 14 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 applies to municipal employees whose wages are fixed under the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Services (Scales of Pay and Allowances) Rules, 1967 and exceed the minimum wage prescribed under the Act.
Whether an application under Section 22 of the Minimum Wages Act for overtime can be entertained by such employees.

Legislation cited

Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961s. 95
Minimum Wages Act, 1948s. 14, s. 22

Subjects

Minimum Wages ActOvertimeMunicipal employeesSection 14Section 22Labour lawService rulesStatutory interpretation

Judgment

.' MUNICIPAL COUNCIL HATTA A
v.
l
,,, BHAGAT SINGH AND ORS.

FEBRUARY 5, 1998

[SUJATA V. MANOHAR AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.] B
,,... --<
Labour Law:

Minimum Wages Act, 1948:
':
S. 14-0vertime-Payment o/-Municipal employees being paid much
c
more than the minimum rate of wages fixed under the Act-Their pay scale
fixed under the relevant Service Rules applicable to the Municipality-Claim
for overtime-Held, s.14 has no application to them-It clearly provides for
payment of overtime only to those employees who are getting minimum rate
of wages under the Act and not to those getting better wages under other D
;l._
statutory Rules-Madhya Pradesh Municipal Services (Scales of Pay and
Allowances) Rules, 1967-

Service Law :

Madhya Pradesh Municipal Services (Scales of Pay and Allowances) E
Rules, 1967:
-,
Municipal Coimcil-Moharrirslpeons-C/aim for overtime uls 14 of
Minimum wages Act-Filing application uls 22 of the Act-Held, their
-:·"' application is misconceived-Overtime u/s 14 is payable to those employees
~
who are getting a minimum rate of wages as prescribed under the Act-Since F
y the employees are getting much more and that too under the Rules, s.14 has
no application to them-Minimum Wages Act, 1948-ss.14 and 22-
Municipality-Employees·-Claiming overtime under Minimum wages Act.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4826 of
1991. G
~ From the Judgment and Order dated 5.8.91 of the Madhya Pradesh High
Court in M.P. No. 2068of1983.
Ashok K. Singh for S.K. Agnihotri for the Appellant.
Amitabh Verma for Ashok Mathur for the Respondents. H
699
700 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998) l S.C.R.
~

A The following Order of the Court was delivered :
T-'

The respondents, who are Moharrirs/peons working with the appellant ...
Municipal Council, Hatta, filed an application under Section 22 of the Minimum
Wages Act, 1948, before the Competent Authority (Labour Court) under the
Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for payment of overtime on the ground that they
B were working for 4 additional hours everyday. Their application for the period
1.2.82 to 31.3.83 has been allowed and the Writ Petition which was filed by
r-
the appellant before the High Court has been dismissed.

The respondents who are employees of the appellant Municipal Council
__..,
are governed by the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961.
c Under Section 95 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, the State C·

Government is entitled, inter alia, to make rules in respect of scale of pay and
all allowances by whatever name called and other service conditions of
Municipal Employees. Pursuant to the power so vested, the Madhya Pradesh
Municipal Services (Scales of Pay and Allowances) Rules, 1967, have been
D framed. The pay scale ofMoharrirs is fixed at Rs. 70-2-80-2 112-100-EB-4-120. ):..'
There is no provision under these Rules for payment of any overtime allowance.

The respondents contended that they would be entitled to overtime '•
under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 by virtue of Section 14 of the said Act.
According to them, service with Local Authority is one of the employment
E covered by the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Now, the minimum wages which
are prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 which would be applicable
to the respondents are Rs. 50 per month. Admittedly, the respondents are
getting wages above the minimum wages prescribed under the Minimum
Wages Act, 1948. The short question is whether Section 14 of the Minimum .;
F Wages Act, 1948 would apply to such persons. Section 14(1) which is relevant ...
for the present purposes is as follow: '(

Section 14 :

"Overtime - ( 1) Where an employee, whose minimum rate of wages is
G fixed under this Act by the hour, by the day or by such a longer wage
period as may be prescribed, works on any day in excess of the -t-
number of hours constituting a normal working day, the employer
shall pay him for every hour or for part of an hour so worked in excess
at the overtime rate fixed under this Act or under any law of the
H appropriate Government for the time being in force, whichever is
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL HATTA v. BHAGAT SINGH 701

higher." A
There is also an amendment to Section 14 by addition of sub-section
(la) under the Minimum Wages (Madhya Pradesh Amendment and Validation)
Act, 1961 being Act 23of1961. Sub-section (la) which is inserted in Section
14 entitles the State Government by Notification to fix the limit for overtime
work in a Scheduled employment. This provision is not directly relevant. To B
claim overtime under Section 14, the following conditions must be fulfilled by
I
an employee (1) the minimum rate of wages should be fixed under the Minimum
Wages Act, 1948; and (2) such an employee should work on any day in
excess of the number of hours constituting a normal working day. Therefore,
overtime under Section 14 is payable to those employees who are getting a C
minimum rate of wage as prescribed under the Minimum wages Act, 1948.
These are the only employees to whon1 overtime under Section 14 would
become payable. In the present case the respondents cannot be described as
employees who are getting a minimum rate of wages fixed under the Minimum
Wages Act, 1948. They are getting much more and that too under the Madhya
Pradesh Municipal Service (Scales of Pay and Allowances) Rules, 1967. D
Therefore, Section 14 has no application to them. We have not been shown
any other provision under which tl1ey can claim overtime.

The application under Section 22 of the Minimum Wages Act, is,
therefore, misconceived. The respondents seem to have proceeded on the E
basis that because employment under any Local Authority is listed as Item
6 in the Schedule to the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 they would automatically
get overtime under the said Act. Section 14, however, clearly ,provides. for
payment of overtime only to those employees who are getting minimum rate
of wage under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. It does not apply to those
. '
y
getting better wages under other statutory Rules. F
' The appeal is, therefore, allowed and the impugned order of the High
Court as well as the Competent Authority under the Minimum wages 1948 is
set aside. There will, however, be no order as to costs.

RP. Appeal allowed.