CONTRACT WORKERS UNION, M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED, BANGALORE Vs. M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED, BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted. Heard counsel on both sides. We have perused the award of the Additional Labour Court, Bangalore, the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the order making a reference for decision on a question of law to the Full Bench of the High Court, the order of the Full Bench of the High Court and the final order of the 1. Karnataka Nigh Court full Bench decision reported in 1992(1) Kar. L.J. 477. Division Bench of The High Court which has given rise to this special leave petition. Having examined the scope of the reference made under Sec. 10(1)(c) and (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Additional Labour Court, Bangalore, dated 2nd Dec., 1985, and the award made by that court and the subsequent proceedings referred to above, we are of the opinion that notwithstanding the finding recorded by the Full Bench of the High Court on the limited issue raised before it for decision, the question whether independent thereof there existed a relationship of employer and employee between the Steel Authority of India Ltd. and its workmen employed through a contractor was required to be examined by the Division Bench in the backdrop of the contentions raised by t1le parties before it and the findings recorded by the Additional Labour Court, Bangalore, and the learned single Judge of the High Court in that behalf. It must be realised that the Additional Labour Court as well as the learned single Judge did not rest their findings on the question of law referred to the Full Bench. Independent thereof they had found the relationship of employer and employee between the said two parties established. Since the Division Bench has not gone into these questions and has rested its decision on the question of law settled by the Full Bench, we think that the other contentions raised in the matter arising out of the reference remain to be answered. We do not propose to express any opinion on the contentions so arising, lest it may prejudice either party. We, however, think that the parties should be heard on the question as to the contentions surviving assuming the answer given on the question referred to the Full Bench is correct and take a decision thereon. The question which the Division Bench would have to consider is whether de hors the decision of the Full Bench of the High Court, the question of relationship of employer and the workmen survives in view of the findings of fact recorded by the Additional Labour Court, Bangalore and the learned single Judge of the High Court. Those questions would have to be examined independent of the finding recorded by the Full Bench on the question of law referred to it and the decision would have to be taken on the merits of the contentions raised before it. We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court and remit the matter to the High Court for decision in the light of the above observations and in accordance with law. The appeal will stand allowed accordingly with no order as to costs.