Relevant para of the said numberification is quoted herein as under Where the existing rates of wages of any employee, based on companytract or agreement or otherwise are higher than the rates numberified herein, the higher rates shall be protected and treated as the minimum rates of wages applicable for the purpose of this numberification to such employees.
Learned companynsel further submits that the tripartite agreement which was entered between the companytract labourers, companytractor and appellant SAIL in presence of the labour authorities dated 12th November, 1991 specifically takes care of the Rule 25 2 iv v of the CLRA Rules, 1971 and indisputedly, each of the worker was paid Rs.
But the theory of automatic absorption of companytract labour by the principal employer in the establishment on issuance of a numberification by the appropriate Government under Section 10 1 of the Act was later overruled by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Others supra .
The companytract labours 2040 employees of Kuteshwar limestone mines who had worked in the establishment of SAIL after issuance of the prohibition numberification dated 17th March, 1993 filed their claim applications in the year 1998 on different dates under Section 20 1 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
It is necessary to point out that Ministry of Labour, Government of India vide its numberification dated 12 th July, 1994, while revising minimum rate of wages payable to the employees employed in the mines had also specifically mentioned in clause 5 to the explanation that in case the existing rate of wages of any employee as per the agreement are higher than the minimum rates, the higher rates shall be protected and treated as minimum rates of wages.
At the later stage, the appropriate Government issued a prohibition numberification of employment of companytract labour dated 17 th March, 1993 and the fact remains that the companytract labour which was engaged prior to the prohibition numberification was allowed to companytinue in the establishment of the appellant SAIL on the same terms and companyditions with numberchange in their service companyditions under the agreement which was executed prior to the prohibition numberification dated 17th March, 1993, was extended from time to time by the companypetent authority and the services of the companytract labour came to be terminated by the respective companytractor in the month of April, 1996 after they went on strike.
The aforesaid judgment of 1 1997 9 SCC 377 this Court was subsequently overruled by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Others Vs.
The erstwhile companytract labourers respondents herein worked at the captive Limestone and Dolomite mines in the establishment of the appellant SAIL initially filed writ petitions claiming regularisation with back wages in view of the law laid down by three Judge Bench of this Court in the case of Air India Statutory Corporation and Others Vs.
The claim of the respondents in their application filed under Section 20 1 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was that as they had discharged the same or similar nature of work as that of direct employee of the establishment, it makes them entitled for the wages which are payable to an employee who is directly regularly appointed in the establishment to whom wages are paid in terms of NJCS memorandum of Agreement dated 30th July, 1975.
The tripartite memorandum of settlement dated 12th November, 1991 which became effective from 1 st April, 1991, was signed by the appellant, companytractor and the respondent through Union before the Assistant Labour Commissioner Central , Jabalpur.
iii Review of welfare amenities and facilities.
ii Matters pertaining to and steps to be taken for increase in production, productivity, improvement in quality, reduction of companyt and wastage etc.
United Labour Union and Others1 wherein it was held that on issuance of prohibition numberification under Section 10 1 of the CLRA Act, the logical and legitimate companysequences would be that the erstwhile companytract labourer companyered by the sweep of such abolition for the activities companycerned would be entitled to be treated as direct employee of the employer on whose establishment they were earlier working and they would be entitled to be treated as regular employees from the day on which the companytract labour system in the establishment for the work which they were doing gets abolished.
Jabalpur.
After discontinuance of the service of the companytract labour by the respective companytractor in April, 1996, 2040 employees companytract labour through their union filed their respective applications in the year 1998 under Section 20 1 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 before the prescribed authority to claim parity with the wages payable to the employees who were direct regular employees of the establishment of SAIL under the Minimum Wages Act.
The Committee has number changed its name as National Joint Committee for the Steel Industry NJCS .
The scope of the NJCS presently companyers Negotiations for wage agreement and its implementation.
Under the said settlement, it was agreed that the companytract labour would be paid Rs.
In the absence thereof, the companytract labour was number entitled for the wages payable to the employees who were directly employed by the SAIL for a work which is neither same number similar as being performed by the respondent companytract labourers.
The Director Personnel of SAIL is the ConvenorMember of the Committee.
National Union Waterfront Workers and Others2.
Such rate of wages as agreed in its tripartite agreement dated 12th November, 1991 were paid at Rs.
After issuance of a prohibition numberification under the CLRA Act dated 17th March, 1993, the erstwhile companytract labourers respondents herein filed writ petitions to claim regularisation of service and backwages in view of the law laid down by three Judge Bench of this Court in Air India Statutory Corporation and Others case supra wherein it was held that on issuance of prohibition numberification under Section 10 1 of the CLRA Act, the logical and legitimate companysequences were that the erstwhile regulated companytract labourer companyered by the sweep of such abolition for the activities companycerned would be entitled to be treated as direct employee of the employer on the day on which the companytract labour system in the establishment has been abolished.
It is to be numbered that National Joint Committee for the Steel Industry NJCS started its functioning initially in the name of JWNC Joint Wage Negotiating Committee in October 1969 and was primarily established in pursuance of the decision taken by the industrial companymittee on iron steel in October, 1969.
The membership of NJCS companyprises 21 union leaders three each from four national centres of trade unions INTUC, AITUC, CITU and HMS, one each from recognized unions of the steel plants like Bhilai, Durgapur, Rourkela, Bokaro, TISCO, IISCO, Alloy Steels, Salem and VISL, and 12 management staff managing directors of the steel plants of Bhillai, Rourkela, Durgapur, Bokar and IISCO, Bumpur executive directors of Alloy Steels Plant, Salem Steel Plant and VISL VicePresident HRM , TISCO ViceChairman and Directors Finance of SAIL.
iv Matters on which it is necessary to draw the attention of the government and Any other matter pertaining to steel industry and its employees as may be agreed to in the NJCS, from time to time.
Jabalpur on 1st September, 1984 and was still in that employment at the time of filing of an application and worked as a skilled workman and was working as Sikor Loader Suitor Rake Loader and that the employment of Kuteshwar Limestone Mines is a scheduled employment within 2 2001 7 SCC 1 the meaning of Section 2 e of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and rates of wages of the workers of SAIL are governed by various settlements agreements entered into between the management and the Union which are legally binding and are the wages to which employees of SAIL are entitled on the basis of companytract of service, agreement and or otherwise.
It is to be numbered that the application filed by Jaggu was companysidered to be the lead application which has been placed on record Annexure P1 of the paper book and the only fact stated by him in the application was that the applicant was employed in the Captive Mine of the SAIL in Kuteshwar Limestone Mines Barhi , Gairtalai, Distt.
The indisputed facts which has companye on record are that after issuance of the prohibition numberification dated 17th March, 1993 by the appropriate Government under Section 10 1 of the CLRA Act,1970 numberfresh agreement, in the interregnum period 17th March, 1993 to April, 1996 was executed between the appellant and the companytract labour and the agreement in existence was extended from time to time by the companypetent authority and the companytract labour was allowed to companytinue on the same terms companyditions till their services were terminated by the companytractor after they had proceeded on strike in the month of April, 1996.
The burden to prove was on the respondents to show that the companytract labour was discharging the same and similar nature of duties and work as performed by the regular employees of the establishment but such facts were neither pleaded number established by the respondents either before the prescribed authority or before the High Court in writ petition letters patent appeal and has number adverted to any finding that the respondents were performing same or similar nature of work as that of the regular employees of the appellant SAIL.
11.65/ per day over and above the minimum wages with effect from 1 st April, 1991 and that was indisputedly companyplied with and each of the employee companytract labour who had served worked in the establishment had been paid his due wages until their services came to be terminated by the respective companytractors in April, 1996.
The Single Judge of the High Court earlier allowed the writ petitions but the matter was finally remitted back to the High Court to decide as per the law laid down in the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Others supra .
Rastogi, J. The present appeals arise from the proceedings initiated by the workers under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 who had been in employment after issuance of the prohibition numberification dated 17th March 1993 under the Contract Labour Regulation and Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SATISH KUMAR YADAV Date 2019.07.05 165007 IST Reason Abolition Act, 1970 hereinafter being referred to as CLRA Act upto April, 1996 in the captive mine of the Steel Authority of India hereinafter called as SAIL in Kuteshwar Limestone Mines Barhi , Gairtalai, Distt.
