MUNIRAJ SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

(2.) It is stated by the petitioners that petitioners were engaged by respondent No.2 i.e M/s Petronet LNG Limited through respondent No.3, a contractor. They were Ex-Servicemen engaged for different periods and all the claimants fell within the definition of Workmen under Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioners were working under the direct control and supervision of M/s Petronet LNG Limited and contract given to respondent No.3 was merely a sham transaction to camouflage true relationship of employer and employee between the management of M/s Petronet LNG Limited and the petitioners. The work performed by the petitioners was of permanent and perennial nature and all the requirements of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970 were satisfied. The management, thus, ought not have engaged the petitioners through respondent No.3 as the same amounts to unfair labour practice. Petitioners have made a representation before the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board on 17.4.2006 requesting the Board to abolish the contract labour system in the establishment of the respondent management. The management ought to have absorbed the claimant workers and regularised their services instead of exploiting the workmen. The petitioners made various representation to regularise them in the existing posts and have also given written representation dated 5.4.2005 to the management. When all the efforts of the claimant/workers to settle the dispute with the management failed they joined the union named APS and SSW Employees Union. The Union also served a demand notice on their behalf on the management dated 20.7.2005 requesting to regularise the services of the claimants and to give them wage parity. The union had also raised an industrial dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner on 27.7.2005 by filing its Statement of Claim.

(3.) The claimant workers had in their meeting dated 16.1.2006 decided to leave the above named APS and SSW Employees Union and join Delhi Multi Storeyed Building Employees Congress. In the said meeting it was also resolved that if for any reason the petitioners would not get the support of any union they would raise an industrial dispute for the regularization of their services and for wage parity and parity in other facilities. The Delhi Multi Storeyed Congress union in its meeting 17.1.2006 resolved that the cause of the petitioners would be espoused by this union before the management and the labour authorities. It had, on the same date, issued a fresh demand notice on behalf of the petitioners inter-alia for the regularisation of their services and when no action was taken by management on the demand raised by the union, the petitioners along with their this union had on 10.2.2006 filed an amended Statement of Claim before the learned ALC, Central. Learned ALC had not passed an order on the petitioners' application u/s 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act but verbally told the respondent management not to disturb the services of the petitioners so long the matter is pending before him and matter is fixed before ALC today itself i.e 11.08.2006. It is submitted that while the petitioners are awaiting the reference of their dispute to the appropriate Industrial Tribunal, the respondent M/s Petronet LNG Limited has threatened to terminate the services of the petitioners immediately after closure of the conciliation proceedings on 11.08.2006. The petitioners have no other forum from where the petitioners can get the interim protection except this Court, therefore, they approached the High Court and sought the relief as prayed.