Minimum wages claim by ex-employees is maintainable under the statutory scheme and prescribed form.

Section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was construed to permit a claim by a person who had been employed but was no longer in service when the application was filed. Reading the definition of "employee" with the rule-making power and Form VI under the Minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950, the SC treated the statutory form's reference to a person who "was/has been employed" as confirming that the remedy extends beyond current employees. The earlier literal view excluding ex-employees was rejected because it did not advance the Act's object of securing minimum wages, and the contrary maintainability objection was unsuccessful.

---

---

Issues: Whether a person who was formerly employed, but was no longer in service on the date of filing an application, could maintain a claim under Section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.

Analysis: The statutory definition of "employee" in Section 2(i) was read with Section 20(2), the rule-making power under Section 30, and Form VI under the Minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950. Form VI expressly contemplated an applicant who "was/has been employed", indicating that the remedy was not confined to present employees alone. The earlier literal view, which excluded ex-employees, was not accepted in light of the scheme of the Act, the form prescribed under the rules, and the need to adopt a construction that advances the object of securing minimum wages. The statutory form was treated as a legitimate aid to construction and as reflecting the intended scope of the provision.

Conclusion: An ex-employee is entitled to invoke Section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The contrary view was rejected, and the challenge to the maintainability of the claim by former employees failed.

---