EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GARHWAL JAL SANSTHAN Vs. CHHOTEY SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Gopal Narain learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 workman.

(2.) Main contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that being a daily wager the respondent No. 1 is not a workman within the meaning of the Act. The second contention is that as the workman worked under the contractor his service under the petitioners came to an end and, therefore, the impugned award not considering the aforesaid aspect is liable to be quashed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 contended that in view of the definition of workman in the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act there is no bar to a daily wager to approach the Labour Court being treated as a workman. With regard to question of employment under the contractor relevant facts in the award have been referred to in support of the contention of the workman.