ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these writ petitions, the petitioner has challenged the validity of award dated 4th February, 2004 passed by the Industrial Tribunal No.1 in ID No.143/96 whereby the reference was answered against the petitioner.

(2.) Briefly, the facts are that the petitioners claimed that they were working as security guards with the respondent management. The management was not providing them legal facilities like conveyance allowance, house rent allowance etc. and the management was not regularizing them though they were doing the same work as those persons who were working in the management on regular basis. They prayed that the contract labour system be abolished and they be regularized. The management dismissed the claim of the petitioners and following disputes were referred by the appropriate Government for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal:

(3.) In the statement of claim, the respondent took the stand that none of the petitioners was the employee of the respondent management. There was no relationship of employer and employee. The management had awarded a contract of hospital security to Senital Security Systems, Faridabad, who used to look after the security of hospital and employed security guards at the hospital as per the requirement. The presence of the security guards, their timings, supervision etc was with the contractor. The management had no control over the claimants. They were employees of the contractor. The learned Labour Court framed an additional issue regarding relationship of the claimants with the management. The evidence of both parties was recorded and after recording evidence and considering the same, the Tribunal came to conclusion that it was the case of the claimants themselves that they were the employees of Senital Security Services and nowhere, either in the statement of claim or in the affidavit, they had stated that they were direct employees of the management. The evidence also showed that they were being paid salary by the contractor and the supervision was also with the contractor. The Tribunal came to conclusion that there was no employer and employee relationship between the management and the claimants and the claimants cannot be granted any relief of regularization and other reliefs as sought by them in the industrial dispute referred to it.