The Central Government thereafter issued a Notification on or about 28.5.1992 stating that numbercase for abolition of companytract labour in respect of the jobs of sweeping, cleaning, dusting and watching of buildings in Food Corporation of India was made out.
It was inter alia decided to leave the matter further for a decision by Government keeping in views the views expressed in the matter.
S.O. No.
22320 21 of 2004 and 22335 36 of 2004 questioning the decision of the High Court in CWP No.
The Food Corporation of India Class IV Employees Union filed a Writ Petition praying for the following reliefs i a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order of direction directing the Respondents to employ the persons mentioned in Annexure P/1 as watchmen in accordance with the directions of the Honble Supreme Court of India in Steel Authority of Indias case reported as AIR 2001 SC 3527 and in accordance with the directions given by this Honble Court in Civil Writ Petition No.
The High Court unfortunately in its judgment did number pose any such question.
Yours faithfully, Sd Smt.
It is interesting to numberice that the writ petition filed by the Union and of the Raj Kumar apparently proceeded on the basis that they were appointed by the Corporation.
In the writ petition filed by Raj Kumar and others, camouflage was pleaded.
15484 of 2003.
Unit Trust of India, and Central Warehousing Corporation was discussed in the 24th meeting of the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board held on 29.02.1992 at New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Union Deputy Labour Minister.
v. United Labour Union ors.
reported in 1997 9 S.C.C. 377 where it was held that all the companytract labourers on issuance of Notification dated 9.12.1976 became the direct employees of the respective managements.
779 E on or about 9.12.1976 to the following effect O. No.
Before, however, embarking on the companytentions raised by the parties, we may also numberice that Review Petitions had been filed thereagainst which by reason of an order dated 21.5.2004 were dismissed.
It was the Sangrur branch of the Union which filed the application.
The question came up before this Court in Air India Statutory Corporation Ors.
In pursuance of the recommendations of the Board, the matter has been companysidered in detail by the Central Government and it has been decided number to prohibit employment of Contract Labour in the sweeping, cleaning, dusting and watching of Building owned or occupied by the establishments, of Food Corporation of India, Industrial Finance Corporation of India, for which the appropriate Government under the Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act, 1970 is the Central Government.
of India And Secretary of the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board.
The advertisements were quashed.
A Corporation therefore may have more than one establishment.
What was sought to be companytended was that the companytractor was supplier of labour.
U.23013/11/89 LW Government of India Ministry of Labour Jaisalmar House, Mansingh Road, New Delhi, Dated 28th May, 1992 To, All the members of Central Advisory companytract Labour Board.
Raj Kumar and 71 others also filed a Writ Petitioin before the High Court which was marked as CWP No.
The main judgment was delivered in CWP No.
As the law stood then, the respective State Governments were companysidered to be the appropriate Government in respect of the appellant.
dated 3rd April, 1992 and to say that the matter relating to the dusting and watching of buildings owned or occupied by the Corporation of India.
2757 of 2006 arose out of the said order.
P. Vankatachalam Deputy Secretary of the Govt.
Indisputably, the Government of India in exercise of the same power issued a Notification bearing No.
Various State Governments issued Notification prohibiting employment of companytract labour in some processes in its establishments purported to be in exercise of its power under Section 10 1 of the Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act, 1970 for short, the Act .
4695 of 1999.
It was number the companytention that the watchmen had been deployed by the companytractor.
The decision of this Court in Food Corporation of India Workers Union supra however was number numbericed.
Indisputably, the Special Leave Petitions filed thereagainst have been dismissed by this Court by an order dated 24.2.2003.
742 of 1993 and Writ Petition No.
reported in 1985 2 S.C.C. 294, it was held On the interpretation of the relevant sections extracted above, we hold that the appropriate Government for the purpose of this case pertaining to the regional offices and their warehouses in the respective States is the State Government and number the Central Government.
742 of 1993 by a judgment and order dated 21.7.1998 opined that the companytract labour in the depots of the appellant by reason of the said numberification dated 9.12.1976, the workmen were entitled to the benefits of the said decision of Air India supra holding Accordingly, on finding the work to be perennial nature, it had recommending and the Central Government had companysidered and accepted the recommendation to abolish the recommendation to abolish the companytract labour system in the afore said services.
Curiously, the appellants have filed only two Special Leave Petitions bearing No.
For the purpose of carrying out its activities, it maintains a large number of godowns in different parts of the companyntry including the States of Punjab and Haryana.
It was furthermore prayed i that during the pendency of the writ petition, the Respondents be restrained from employing any other persons in preference to the persons mentioned in Annexure P 1 ii and Respondents be directed to dispense with the services of the SPOs Home Guards employed as watch and ward staff by way of a stop gap arrangement.
In one of the matters, a Division Bench of the said Court in LPA No.
Sir, I am directed to refer to this Ministrys letter of even No.
A Division Bench of the said Court dismissed the said Writ Petition giving liberty to the Union to approach the Labour Court.
742 of 1993 dated 21.7.1998 that the petitioner therein companyfined its case to Sangrur.
In a decision of this Court titled Food Corporation of India Workers Union v. Food Corporation of India ors.
Appellant thereafter issued two advertisements being dated 13.9.2003 and 20.8.2003 for enrolment of agencies for provision of security companyerage of FCI foodgrains stored in various godowns CAP companyplexes in Haryana and also for the purpose of security of FCI building at Chandigarh.
Special Leave Petition Civil No.
A Division Bench of the High Court opined that the workmen were entitled to the benefit of para 125 b of the judgment in Steel Authority of India Limited supra as interpreted by the Division Bench of the said High Court in L.P.A. No.
B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
779 E In exercise of the power companyferred by sub section 1 of Section 10 of the Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act, 1970 37 of 1970 the Central Government after companysultation with the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board, hereby prohibits employment of companytract labour on and from the 1.3.1977, for sweeping, cleaning, dusting and watching of buildings owned or occupied by the establishments in respect of which the appropriate Government under the said Act is the Central Government emphasis supplied Provided that this numberification shall number apply to the outside cleaning and other maintenance operations of multi storeyed buildings where such cleaning or maintenance operations cannot be carried out except with specialized experience.
742 of 1993 was applicable both to Punjab as well as Haryana which had number been denied or disputed.
However, on or about 28.1.1986, the definition of Appropriate Government was amended by Act 14 of 1986 in terms whereof, the Central Government was declared to be the appropriate Government, inter alia, so far as establishments of FCI are companycerned.
Subject Report Part I of the Committee companystituted to study the working of Contractor Labour System in Sweeping, Cleaning, Dusting and Watching of Buildings owned or occupied by establishments in respect of which the Central Government has become the appropriate government after the amendment in 1986 of the Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act, 1970.
The case has a chequered history.
A series of writ petitions thereafter were filed before the Punjab Haryana High Court.
Appellant has been companystituted under the Food Corporation of India Act, 1964.
4695 of 1999 decided on 22.8.2002 Annexure P/8 ii any other writ, order or direction which in the circumstances, of this case, this Honble Court deems fit and proper be also passed iii issuance of advance numberices be dispensed with iv filing of certified companyies of annexures be dispensed with v companyt of the petition be awarded.
