T VAJRAPPA vs SENIOR LABOUR INSPECTOR

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024







IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 9909 OF 2024 (L-MW)

BETWEEN:

T VAJRAPPA
S/O LATE DODDATHIMMARAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT NO 133
SOWMYA NILAYA, PLAGUEAMMA TEMPLE ROAD
KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD
BENGALURU-560062
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KUSHAL GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. ABHINAY Y T., ADVOCATE)








AND:

1. SENIOR LABOUR INSPECTOR
28TH ZONE, BENGALURU-560061.

2. COMMISSIONER
BHRUHAT BENGALURU MHANAGAR PALIKE
BBMP HEAD OFFICE, NR CIRCLE
BENGALURU-560002.

3. JOINT COMMISSIONER
BBMP, BOMMANAHALLI
BENGALURU-560068.

4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BBMP, BOMMANAHALLI ZONE
BOMMANAHALLI
BENGALURU-560068.




Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024


5. ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND
THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE
MININUM WAGES ACT 1948
REGIONAL 1, BENGALURU-560073
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.M. RAJAKUMAR, AGA FOR R1 & R5:
SRI. SANJEEV B.L., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 21ST OF DECEMBER 2023 PASSED IN UUKAAABE-
01/MWA/CR-284/2016-17 PASSED BY THE R5 - ASSISTANT LABOUR
COMMISSIONER AND THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE MINIMUM WAGES
ACT, 1948 (ANNEXURE-H) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India, calling in question the order
dated 21.12.2023 passed by the fifth respondent under
the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as
the ‘Act’), directing the petitioner to pay a sum of
Rs.14,61,936/- towards the difference in wages payable to
61 employees.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024


The petitioner was the successful tenderer and was
awarded the contract for cleaning Ward No. 194 of the
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) by the
second respondent. On 18.09.2014, the first respondent,
the Senior Labour Inspector, filed an application under
Section 20(2) of the Act before the competent authority.
The said application was registered as Case No. 284/2016-
17. Subsequently, the fifth respondent, being the
competent authority, passed the impugned order dated
22.12.2023 directing the petitioner to pay a sum of
Rs.14,61,936/- towards the difference in wages payable to
the 61 employees referred to in the order. Aggrieved by
the said order, the petitioner has approached this Court.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
raised the following contentions:
(i) Firstly, the impugned order was passed without
affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. On
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024


this ground alone, the impugned order is liable to be set
aside for the violation of the principles of natural justice.
(ii) Secondly, although the application was filed
under Section 20 of the Act, the petitioner was not initially
impleaded as a party to the proceedings before the fifth
respondent. Subsequently, by order dated 19.11.2022, the
petitioner was impleaded as a party and notice was issued
to him. The petitioner entered appearance and sought
time to file objections. Thereafter, no effective proceedings
were conducted. Without affording the petitioner an
opportunity to file objections and substantiate his case,
the matter was posted for orders, and the impugned order
came to be passed. Hence, learned counsel sought to
allow the writ petition.
4. Per contra, learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that
the impugned order was passed after affording an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Accordingly,
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024


learned Additional Government Advocate sought dismissal
of the writ petition.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the writ petition papers.
6. It is not in dispute that the first respondent filed
an application under Section 20(2) of the Act before the
fifth respondent in respect of 61 employees. The fifth
respondent registered the said application as Case No.
284/2016-17 under Section 20 of the Act.
7. Initially, the petitioner was not impleaded as a
party to the proceedings before the fifth respondent. As is
evident from the order sheet produced by the petitioner,
he was subsequently impleaded by order dated
19.11.2022, whereupon notice was issued to him. The
matter was posted to 13.01.2023. On that date, the
petitioner appeared through his representative and sought
time to file objections along with supporting documents.
Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 06.04.2023.
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024


8. On 06.04.2023, the Presiding Officer was on leave,
and the matter was adjourned to 29.06.2023. On the said
date, as the Government had declared a holiday, the
matter was adjourned to 21.07.2023. On 21.07.2023, the
Presiding Officer was again on leave, and the matter was
adjourned to 05.10.2023. On 05.10.2023, the matter was
reserved for orders.
9. A perusal of the order sheet makes it evident that,
after the petitioner was impleaded, no effective
opportunity was afforded to him to file his objections,
produce supporting documents, and substantiate his case.
Section 20(3) of the Act mandates that the competent
authority shall hear the applicant and the employer, afford
them an opportunity of being heard, conduct such further
enquiry as may be necessary, and thereafter pass an
appropriate order.
10. In the present case, the order sheet clearly
indicates that the petitioner was not afforded an effective
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024


opportunity of being heard before the matter was reserved
for orders. The impugned order, therefore, has been
passed in contravention of the requirement under Section
20(3) of the Act and in violation of the principles of natural
justice. Accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be set
aside, and the matter warrants reconsideration by the
competent authority after affording both parties a
reasonable opportunity of being heard.
11. Accordingly, the following order is passed:
ORDER

(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The order dated 21.12.2023 passed by the fifth
respondent in Case No. 284/2016-17 is hereby set
aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted to the fifth respondent for
fresh consideration in accordance with law, after
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57327
WP No. 9909 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010192442024


affording both parties a reasonable opportunity of
being heard.
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD)
JUDGE






CM
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 65