OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION Vs. LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is delay of 18 days in filing this appeal. Though, we notice that the first respondent is the Labour Commissioner, U.P. Kanpur, the other parties i.e. respondent nos. 2 to 18 are represented by Mr. D.S. Patni, learned counsel. In the circumstances, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the reason for delay has been satisfactorily explained hence delay should be condoned. Accordingly, the delay condonation application will stand allowed and the delay will stand condoned.

(2.) Appellant is the writ petitioner. The writ petition is one, which is styled by the petitioner to be under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. This case is a sequel to an earlier litigation, which was launched in the Allahabad High Court. By way of Writ Petition 23588 of 1987 Bhagat Singh and Others Vs. ONGC, it was decided by Allahabad High Court on 11.10.1990, the Allahabad High Court framed certain questions and referred to be decided by the Labour Commissioner. The workers, who were petitioners in the petition claimed to be daily wagers and who, according to the appellant/writ petitioner, were contractual labourers, approached the Allahabad High Court and in the same, the learned Single Judge in regard to the plea for regularization and payment of wages equal to the regularly employed Class-IV employees of the company, took the view that it cannot be decided in the writ petition and consequently by judgment dated 11.10.1990 directed as follows:

(3.) Pursuant to the same, the matter was referred to the Labour Commissioner. The Writ Petition, which was filed by the appellant in this case before Allahabad High Court, is one, which is filed challenging the decision of the Labour Commissioner dated 210.1991. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition by the judgment impugned in the appeal dated 22.02018. In doing so, the learned Single Judge took the following view: