Minimum wage proceedings cannot parity claims; contract labour also cannot automatically claim regular wage structure after prohibition notification.

Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is confined to enforcement of notified minimum wages and related amounts, so claims based on parity with regular employees or equal pay for equal work are outside its scope. Under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, a prohibition notification under Section 10(1) does not by itself create automatic absorption or entitlement to the regular employees' wage settlement. Contract labour paid the contractual rate, above minimum wages, cannot automatically claim the NJCS or regular wage structure without pleading and proof of identical work and a legal basis for such parity.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the authority under Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 could entertain claims seeking parity with the wages of regular employees and apply the principle of equal pay for equal work; (ii) whether contract labour continued after a prohibition notification under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 was entitled to wages under the regular employees' wage settlement or NJCS structure.

Issue (i): whether the authority under Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 could entertain claims seeking parity with the wages of regular employees and apply the principle of equal pay for equal work.

Analysis: The scheme of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is concerned with fixation and enforcement of minimum rates of wages, overtime rates, and wages for rest days. The jurisdiction under Section 20 is confined to claims arising from payment below the notified minimum rates or other amounts expressly covered by the Act. A claim founded on wage parity with regular employees, or on the doctrine of equal pay for equal work, raises a different dispute and cannot be treated as a proceeding for mere recovery of minimum wages. The authority under the Minimum Wages Act was therefore not the proper forum for adjudicating such parity-based claims.

Conclusion: The claim for parity of wages was not maintainable before the authority under Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and was against the workmen.

Issue (ii): whether contract labour continued after a prohibition notification under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 was entitled to wages under the regular employees' wage settlement or NJCS structure.

Analysis: The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 regulates contract labour and provides for abolition in specified circumstances, but does not create automatic absorption or conversion into regular employment on issuance of a prohibition notification. Rule 25 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Central Rules, 1971 governs the contractor's obligations, including payment not below the minimum wages or the agreed rates where applicable, and the protection of higher existing wage rates. On the facts, the contract labour had already been paid the higher contractual rate over minimum wages in terms of the tripartite settlement. The record also did not establish, as a matter of pleading and proof, that the contract labour performed the same or similar work as the regular employees so as to attract the regular wage settlement. The NJCS wage structure was meant for direct/regular employees and could not automatically be extended to the contract labourers.

Conclusion: The contract labourers were not entitled to claim the regular employees' wage structure or NJCS wages, and the award of such parity was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The wage-parity claims were outside the scope of the Minimum Wages Act and unsupported under the contract labour regime; the orders granting such relief were set aside and the employer succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A claim for parity with regular employees' wages, including under the doctrine of equal pay for equal work, cannot be adjudicated as a claim for minimum wages under Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and contract labour paid the contractual rate cannot automatically claim the regular employees' wage structure merely because employment continued after a prohibition notification under the CLRA Act.

---