Bhikusa Yamasa Kshatriya v. Union of India

Facts

• Central Government fixed minimum wages for employment in a scheduled industry
• Employer (Bhikusa Yamasa) challenged the fixation as arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g)
• Argued: the prescribed minimum was so high that it made business unviable
• Government defended under Article 19(6) (reasonable restriction)

Issue

1. Whether fixation of minimum wages by government violates the employer's fundamental right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g).

Held

• Minimum Wages Act is welfare legislation protecting workers from exploitation
• Fixation of minimum wages is a reasonable restriction under Article 19(6)
• No employer has a fundamental right to carry on business by paying starvation wages
• If an employer cannot pay minimum wages, the business has no right to exist
• Challenge dismissed

Ratio Decidendi

The fixation of minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is a reasonable restriction on the right to carry on business. An industry that cannot pay minimum wages has no right to exist. The protection of workers from exploitation is a matter of public interest justifying the restriction.