Section 17-B Wages Payable From Application Date | HC
- News|Blog|Labour & Industrial Laws|
- 3 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 1 July, 2026

Case Details: Sandeep Jain vs. Kuldeep - [2026] 186 taxmann.com 677 (HC-Delhi)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Shail Jain, J.
- Ms Abha Kulshreshtha, Adv. for the Petitioner.
- K.C. Dubey, Ms Uma Trafdar & Rishav Dubey, Advs for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
In the instant case, the respondents/workmen were employed with the petitioner/management as the Assistant Machine Men/Pawala Machine Men. Their services were terminated in 2009.
The Labour Court, by the Award dated 17-5-2016, held termination illegal and directed reinstatement with continuity of service, consequential benefits and 50 per cent back wages.
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the Award. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents filed applications under section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking wages computed on the basis of minimum wages applicable to a skilled worker under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, along with litigation expenses.
It was noted that the respondents had filed affidavits affirming that they had remained unemployed and unable to secure gainful employment since the termination of their services, that they were neither employed in any establishment nor receiving adequate remuneration, and that they remained ready and willing to resume duties in terms of the Award.
Further, it was noted that the respondents had thus discharged the initial burden cast upon them under section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The High Court observed that the petitioner had failed to place any cogent material on record to establish that the respondents were gainfully employed in any establishment or were receiving adequate remuneration during the pendency of proceedings.
Further, The High Court observed that, since applications under section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were filed nearly nine years after institution of writ petition and no satisfactory explanation had been furnished for such delay, the respondents were entitled to wages computed on basis of minimum wages applicable to a skilled worker from date of filing of respective applications till disposal of writ petition or till their date of superannuation, whichever was earlier.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the prayer seeking reimbursement of litigation expenses was liable to be declined, as no specific material had been placed on record in support thereof.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Dena Bank v. Kiritikumar T. Patel [1998] 1997 taxmann.com 2094 (SC)(para 26)
- Jamia Hamdard v. Joginder Singh [W.P. (C) No. 5823 of 2012, dated 26-2-2026] (para 27) followed
- M.D. Balasaheb Desai Sahakari S.K. Ltd. v. Kashinath Ganapati Kambale [2009] 2008 taxmann.com 11706 (SC) /AIR 2008 SC (Supp) 1087,
- Manager (Now Regional Director), R.B.I. v. Gopinath Sharma [2006] 2006 taxmann.com 2716 (SC) /AIR 2006 SC 2614,
- Thakur Singh Rawat v. Jagjeet Industries Ltd. 2006 (II) AD (Delhi) 225,
- Municipal Council, Sujanpur v. Surinder Kumar [2006] 2006 taxmann.com 2579 (SC) / AIROnline 2006 SC 317,
- Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation v. Intejam Ali Zafri [2006] 2006 taxmann.com 2705 (SC) /AIR Online 2006 SC 422,
- State of Rajasthan v. Rameshwar Lal Gahlot AIR 1996 SC 1001,
- Pratima Seth v. Management of M/s. Ansal Properties and Industries Ltd. 2007 (III) AD (Delhi) 314,
- Administrator, Kamla Nehru Memorial Hospital v. Vinod Kumar [2006] 2005 taxmann.com 2724 (SC) /AIR 2006 SC 584,
- Purafil Engineers v. Shaikh Anwar Abdul Rahman [2000] 1999 taxmann.com 2394 (Bombay),
- Shree Ji Sarees v. Ved Prakash 2015 (VI) AD (Delhi) 602, S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath AIR 1994 SC 853 (para 28) distinguished
List of Cases Referred to
- Kuldeep v. Jain Conductors India [LIR No. 6971 of 2016] (para 3)
- Jamia Hamdard v. Joginder Singh [W.P. (C) No. 5823 of 2012, dated 26-2-2026] (para 8)
- S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath AIR 1994 SC 853 (para 13)
- Shree Ji Sarees v. Ved Prakash 2015 (VI) AD (Delhi) 602 (para 13)
- Purafil Engineers v. Shaikh Anwar Abdul Rahman [2000] 1999 taxmann.com 2394 (Bombay) (para 13)
- Administrator, Kamla Nehru Memorial Hospital v. Vinod Kumar [2006] 2005 taxmann.com 2724 (SC) (para 13)
- Pratima Seth v. Management of M/s. Ansal Properties and Industries Ltd. 2007 (III) AD (Delhi) 314 (para 13)
- State of Rajasthan v. Rameshwar Lal Gahlot AIR 1996 SC 1001 (para 13)
- Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation v. Intejam Ali Zafri [2006] 2006 taxmann.com 2705 (SC) (para 13)
- Municipal Council, Sujanpur v. Surinder Kumar [2006] 2006 taxmann.com 2579 (SC) (para 13)
- Thakur Singh Rawat v. Jagjeet Industries Ltd. 2006 (II) AD (Delhi) 225 (para 13)
- Manager (Now Regional Director), R.B.I. v. Gopinath Sharma [2006] 2006 taxmann.com 2716 (SC) (para 13)
- M.D. Balasaheb Desai Sahakari S.K. Ltd. v. Kashinath Ganapati Kambale [2009] 2008 taxmann.com 11706 (SC) (para 13)
- Food Craft Institute v. Rameshwar Sharma 2006 SCC OnLine Del 505 (para 19)
- Dena Bank v. Kiritikumar T. Patel [1998] 1997 taxmann.com 2094 (SC) (para 20)
- Surjeet Singh v. Dominant Systems (P.) Ltd. [2023] 4 taxmann.com 2183 (Delhi) (para 21)
- Raj Gariha Vishram Sadan v. Vijay Kate 2006 SCC OnLine Del 1626 (para 22)
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

CA | CS | CMA