HDFC Bank Limited Vs The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1663206
CourtChennai High Court
Decided OnJul-01-2026
Case NumberWP(MD)/18423/2026
JudgeHonourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani
AppellantHDFC Bank Limited
RespondentThe Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Excerpt:
before the madurai bench of madras high court dated : 01.07.2026coram:the honourable mr.justice m.dhandapani and wmp (md) nos.13643 & 13645 of 2026 hdfc bank limited rep.by branch manager thiruppathur branch sivagangai district -630 211. ... petitioner(s) vs. 1.the authority under the minimum wages act, 1948 (joint commissioner of labour), thamarai thotti, race course, madurai - 625 002. 2.k.selvarathinam ... respondent(s) prayer : writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, praying this court to issue a writ of certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 09.07.2024 in m.w. no.53/2024 passed by the minimum wages authority, madurai, 1st respondent and to quash the same. for petitioner : mr.c.mohan for m/s.kind and partridge for r1 : mr.m.mahaboob athiff, counsel for stateorderthis writ petition has been filed challenging the ex parte order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the first respondent fastening liability upon the petitioner bank.2. heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. by consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. since no adverse order is going to be passed, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with.4.the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the second respondent was working as a security guard in the petitioner bank through a contractor. according to the second respondent, minimum wages were not paid to him. consequently, the inspector of labour filed an application under the minimum wages act, 1948, before the first respondent in m.w. no.53 of 2024. the first respondent passed an ex parte order against the petitioner bank. aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.5. the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that thepetitioner has already paid the minimum wages payable to the second respondent in order to avoid prosecution. it is further submitted that the impugned ex parteorder was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner andis, therefore, liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice.6. the learned government advocate appearing for the firstrespondent fairly submits that the impugned order is an ex parte order and that the same came to be passed as the petitioner did not appear before the authority.7. considering the facts and circumstances of the case and takingnote of the fact that the impugned ex parte order was passed without affording an effective opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, this court is of the view that the same has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. since theorder also exposes the petitioner to the risk of prosecution, the impugned order isliable to be set aside on this ground alone.8. accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.07.2024 is set aside andthe matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration. the first respondent shall afford sufficient opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, preferably within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. no costs. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.01.07.2026 ncc : yes / no index : yes / no internet : yes pkn to the authority under the minimum wages act, 1948 (joint commissioner of labour), thamarai thotti, race course, madurai - 625 002.m.dhandapani,j.pknorder made indated : 01.07.2026
Judgment:

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.07.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and WMP (MD) Nos.13643 & 13645 of 2026 HDFC Bank Limited Rep.by Branch Manager Thiruppathur Branch Sivagangai District -630 211. ... Petitioner(s) vs. 1.The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Joint Commissioner of Labour), Thamarai Thotti, Race Course, Madurai - 625 002. 2.K.Selvarathinam ... Respondent(s) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 09.07.2024 in M.W. No.53/2024 passed by the Minimum Wages Authority, Madurai, 1st respondent and to quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Mohan for M/s.Kind and Partridge For R1 : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff, Counsel for State

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the ex parte order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the first respondent fastening liability upon the petitioner bank.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. Since no adverse order is going to be passed, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the second respondent was working as a Security Guard in the petitioner Bank through a contractor. According to the second respondent, minimum wages were not paid to him. Consequently, the Inspector of Labour filed an application under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, before the first respondent in M.W. No.53 of 2024. The first respondent passed an ex parte order against the petitioner Bank. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

petitioner has already paid the minimum wages payable to the second respondent in order to avoid prosecution. It is further submitted that the impugned ex parte

order was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and

is, therefore, liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice.

6. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the first

respondent fairly submits that the impugned order is an ex parte order and that the same came to be passed as the petitioner did not appear before the authority.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking

note of the fact that the impugned ex parte order was passed without affording an effective opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the same has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Since the

order also exposes the petitioner to the risk of prosecution, the impugned order is

liable to be set aside on this ground alone.

8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.07.2024 is set aside and

the matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The first respondent shall afford sufficient opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, preferably within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

01.07.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes PKN To The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Joint Commissioner of Labour), Thamarai Thotti, Race Course, Madurai - 625 002.

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

PKN

ORDER MADE IN

DATED : 01.07.2026