New Delhi, April 27: The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Centre to place on record its policy with regard to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) notification directing private companies/firms to pay full salaries/wages to their employees and workers during COVID19 lockdown.
A Bench headed by Justice NV Ramana issued the direction on petitions filed by Ludhiana Hand Tools Association, Ficus Pax Private Limited — a packaging company from Karnataka and others challenging the March 29 MHA notification asking them to ensure that no employee/worker is terminated and they were paid full salaries and wages.
However, Mumbai-based textile firm Nagreeka Exports chose to withdraw its petition.
An association of 41 companies and firms from Punjab had last week moved the Supreme Court against the MHA notification asking private establishments to pay full wages to workers during COVID19 lockdown.
Ludhiana Hand Tools Association also challenged the validity of Section 10(2)(i) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
The provisions of this Act cannot “impinge upon express provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and take away the right to lay off workmen during times of natural calamity, it said.
Terming the MHA order under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, as arbitrary, it said the order violated the private companies’ right to carry on any occupation, trade or business guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
“Govt has not taken any steps for workforce, instead put the burden on employers to pay full wages,” the petitioner said.
An employer and employee have reciprocal promises whereby the right of an employee to demand salary is reciprocal to performance of work by such employee, the petition said, adding that an employer has a right not to pay if no work is done.
Private employers should be completely exempted from paying their workmen during the lockdown as one-sided implementation of contract alone was not permitted, it argued.
The Disaster Management Act — under which these notifications for payment of salaries were issued — didn’t provide for continued payment of wages by employers to their employees and workers during any disaster, the companies, said, adding orders were beyond the scope of the Act.
