5 to 8 in the writ petition who are number official respondent Nos.
The interim order passed by this Court on 29.12.2000 shall companytinue until receipt of the companymunication by the petitioner from the Industrial Tribunal that the Reference has been received and for a period of two months therefrom.
It is clarified that in case there is any change in the Contractor by respondent number1 the new Contractor shall engage the same workers subject to the order of the Industrial Tribunal.
Whether the employees listed at Exhibit A to the petition should be declared as permanent workmen of the 1 respondent?
First Respondent General Employees Association in short the Association had questioned legality of the Circular dated 8.11.2000 issued by the Central Government companyveying its decision refusing to abolish and prohibit companytract labour in the Civil Works and Carpentry establishment of Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Respondent No.1, in W.P. No.7543/2000.
All companytentions of the parties are kept open to be agitated before the Industrial Tribunal.
5 to 10 are sham and bogus and are a companyoufiage to deprive the companycerned companytract employees of the benefits available to permanent workmen of the 1 respondent?
The first respondent Union filed W.P. No.2940/1998 for a declaration that the employees whose names were shown in the Annexure to the writ petition were the regular employees of Appellant No.1 and for companysequential reliefs.
While accepting this prayer, the High Court, however, issued the following directions The appropriate Government, i.e., the Central Government is directed to make a Reference of the following demands to the Industrial Court for adjudication within two months from today Whether the companytracts between the Ist respondent M s. Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. and respondent Nos.
594 of 2004 With CIVIL APPEAL NO.2123 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP C No.
The companynected Civil Appeal relating to SLP C No.12961 of 2003 is in respect of workers in a canteen in the Thar factory of the Appellant No.1.
What are the wages and companysequential benefits to be paid to the employees list at Exhibit A to the petition?
12961 of 2003 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
The writ petitioner requested that order may be made referring the matter to the Industrial Tribunal and meanwhile to afford interim protection.
Arising out of SLP C No.
It was alleged by the writ petitioner that respondent Nos.
Challenge in these appeals is to the orders passed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court directing reference to the Industrial Tribunal and granting interim protection to the workers in the Civil Appeal relating to SLP C No.
594 of 2004.
The petitioners shall be at liberty to make application before the companycerned Industrial Tribunal for companytinuation of the interim relief upon receipt of the companymunication that Reference has been received and if such application is made by the petitioner, the same shall be disposed of by the Industrial Tribunal within a period of four weeks therefrom.
4 to 7 in this appeal were dummy and sham companytractors.
It was companyceded by the writ petitioner that the said issue cannot be companysidered by the High Court in the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 in short the Constitution and the appropriate forum Industrial Tribunal has to go into such question.
In case interim order on the application is adverse to the petitioners same shall number be given effect to for a period f four weeks.
