RAYMOND LTD Vs. TUKARAM TANAJI MANDHARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Full Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition Nos. Nos. 1204/2003, 7673/2003 and 9449/2003.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) The facts of the case are that the Petitioners filed complaints under Section 28 read with items 1 (a)(b), (d) and (f) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the MRTU and PULP Act), before the Industrial Court/Labour Court for certain reliefs claiming that they are employees of the Respondent company. The Respondent company in all these writ petitions has disputed the status of the employees and has contended in its written statement that there is no relationship of employer employee with any of the Petitioners. The company has contended that the complainants were employed through the contractors and that the issue regarding maintainability of the complaints would have to be decided by the court. During the pendency of these complaints, the judgments in the case of Vividh Kamgar Sabha v. Kalyani Steel Ltd., (2001) 2 SCC 381 and in the case of Cipla Ltd. v. Maharashtra General Kamgar Union (2001) 3 SCC 101 were pronounced by the this Court, and relying upon these decisions, an application was made by the Respondent company before the court that the complaints were liable to be dismissed as there was no employer employee relationship between it and the complainants. The Industrial Court/Labour Court upheld the preliminary objection raised by the Respondent company by holding that the judgments in Kalyani Steel Ltd. and Cipla Ltd. (supra) were applicable to the facts involved in the complaints and, therefore, the complaints deserve to be dismissed. The complaints were accordingly dismissed.