-
ALSO READ
Delhi: AAP holds protest over non-payment of salaries of MCD employees
AAP seeks immediate shut down of all pollution causing thermal power plants
AAP creating confusion by blaming farmers for pollution in Delhi: Congress
AAP to support Dec 8 nationwide strike called by famers over new agri laws
AAP MLA Somnath Bharti gets bail in one case, hearing on another tomorrow
-
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined to pass any interim order putting on hold the operation of an AAP government order with regard to dearness allowances (DA) to be paid to unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled workers in the national capital.
However, a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh which refused to stay, for now, the December 7, 2020 order of the Delhi government's labour department fixing the dearness allowances, observed that it was tough to survive in the national capital on a minimum wage of Rs 15,000.
The court issued notice to the Delhi government and its labour department and sought its stand on the application moved by the Apex Chamber of Commerce and Industry of NCT Delhi for stay of the December 7, 2020 order.
The application was filed in the main petition filed by the petitioner-organisation challenging an October 2019 notification issued by the Delhi government revising the minimum wages for all classes of workmen or employees.
The Delhi government, represented by its additional standing counsel Sanjoy Ghose and advocate Rishab Je, meanwhile has defended its October 2019 notification saying the rates were fixed based on the average prices of food items, clothing, housing, light and fuel, children's education, medical treatments and other factors.
The Delhi government, in an affidavit, has said that before fixing the minimum wages, the Delhi Minimum Wages Advisory Board was set up and it comprised all stakeholders including the petitioners and it had held several rounds of meetings, deliberations and discussions.
As no consensus was formed after the discussions, the matter was put to vote and the rates were approved by majority of members of the Board, the affidavit has said.
The petitioner organisation, which claims to represent interests of around 50,000 Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) in the national capital, has contended that the December 7, 2020 order of the Additional Labour Commissioner, Labour Department, was "ex facie erroneous" as the DA has been determined with retrospective effect from April 1, 2020 and October 1, 2020.
"It is submitted that the impugned order dated December 7, 2020 cannot be issued retrospectively," the organisation has said in its application.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Dear Reader,
Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.
As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.
Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.
Digital Editor
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU