That judgment was assailed by the management in this Court, by special leave, in Civil Appeal No.1854 of 1998.
Appellant No.1 is Government of India Undertaking and appellant No.2 is its General Manager hereinafter they will be referred to as the management .
The validity of the pronouncement of the High Court on those two aspects is assailed by the management in this appeal before us.
Shramik Sena Ors.
Those appeals were dismissed by a three Judge Bench of this Court on August 4, 1999, reported in Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. Anr.
The present writ petition which has given rise to this appeal, is the third in the series.
On August 29, 1997, the High Court disposed of the writ petition taking the view that as the workmen were engaged in a statutory canteen they ipso facto became the employees of the principal employer, namely, the management and ordered their absorption subject to companyditions a to e which will be referred to presently.
And inasmuch as the High Court imposed certain companyditions for their absorption, the workmen also filed Civil Appeal No.1855 of 1998, by special leave of this Court.
To companyprehend the companytroversy in this appeal, narration of the following facts will be useful.
The first respondent is the union of workmen of appellant No.1 and the second respondent is its member and a workman hereinafter they will be referred to as the workmen .
Thereafter, for similar reliefs the workmen filed Writ Petition No.5817 of 1999 in the High Court, but the same was dismissed as withdrawn on November 17, 1999.
LITTTTTTTJJ U D G M E N T Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. Leave is granted.
The Judgment and order of a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.979 of 2000 passed on April 26, 2000, is brought under challenge in this appeal by special leave.
1999 6 SCC 439.
