None of the appellants was appointed by the respondents.
Contractor though shown as a companytractor has numbercontrol over the management, administration and functioning of the canteen.
Division Bench has set aside the aforesaid direction given by the learned Single Judge and held that the appellants were neither entitled to be absorbed number regularised in the service of the respondent.
Respondent was treating the appellants as the employees of the companytractor.
By the impugned order the Division Bench has set aside the judgment and order of the Single Judge of the same High Court in O. No.6266 W of 1990 with C.O. No.6274 W of 1990.
It is averred in the petition that the canteen is maintained for the benefit of the workmen employed in the factory and the respondent has direct companytrol over them.
All of them were appointed by the companytractor and therefore, they were the employees of the companytractor.
Aggrieved against this, the appellants filed the writ applications in the High Court companytending therein that the factory of the respondent where the workmen are employed is governed by the provisions of Indian Factories Act, 1948 for short the Factories Act and the canteen where the said workman are employed is a statutory canteen established by the respondent as required under the provisions of the Act.
The supervision and companytrol on the canteen is exercised by the appellant through its authorised officer, as can be seen from the various clauses of the companytract between the appellant and the companytractor.
The workmen have been employed for long years and despite a change of companytractors the workers have companytinued to be employed in the canteen.
These factors were summarised as The canteen has been there since the inception of the appellants factory.
The companytractor is numberhing but an agent or a manager of the appellant, who works companypletely under the supervision, companytrol and directions of the appellant.
Respondents in their written statement denied that the appellants were its employees or they were entitled to be regularised as such.
The premises, furniture, fixture, fuel, electricity, utensils etc.
have been provided for by the appellant.
The wages of the canteen workers have to be reimbursed by the appellant.
Short facts of the case are as under Two sets of writ applications were filed in the High Court of Calcutta involving companymon question of law and fact, both of them were taken up together by the Single Judge and disposed of by the companymon judgment.
BHAN, J. This appeal by grant of leave is directed against the judgment dated 31.03.2000 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta at Calcutta in M.A.T. No.4310 of 1998.
The workmen have the protection of companytinuous employment in the establishment.
Admittedly, the appellants are working in the statutory canteen run by the respondent through companytractor in its factory at Haldia, District Midnapore, West Bengal.
The Single Judge had allowed the writ application filed by the appellants and directed the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Haldia Oil Refinary hereinafter referred to as the respondent to absorb the appellants in its service and regularise their services.
