(1.) Does the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) have the Jurisdiction to direct the principal employer to pay the differential wages payable to an employee of a contractor, under Sec. 21(4) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 while dealing with a conciliation proceedings under Sec. 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? The answer lies intrinsically interwind under various provisions of multiple enactments.
(2.) M/s.HLL Life Care Limited, which is a public sector undertaking under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, is before this Court against Ext.P4 order issued by the 3rd respondent, Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Thiruvananthapuram by which it is made liable for the alleged non-payment of minimum wages by the 1 st respondent, M/s. Sapthazeal Private Limited, under the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.
(3.) As per Ext.P1 agreement of contract entered into between the petitioner and the 1 st respondent, the 1st respondent was entrusted with the job of providing house keeping facility at the petitioner's factory at Peroorkkada, Thiruvananthapuram. The 2nd respondent, which is a Trade Union and claims to be representing the workers of the 1 st respondent, submitted a complaint before the 3rd respondent stating that they have not received minimum wages notified by the Government of India. The said complaint is produced as Ext.P2. Pursuant to Ext.P2, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P3 notice dtd. 28/7/2017 calling for the petitioner and the 1 st respondent for conciliation meeting under Sec. 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. By Ext.P4 order dtd. 8/12/2017, the 3rd respondent came to the conclusion that the petitioner is liable to pay minimum wages to the workers of the 2nd respondent Trade Union employed by the 1 st respondent on its failure to pay the same under the provisions of law. It is challenging Ext.P4 order passed by the 3 rd respondent, this writ petition is filed.