REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

SHRI G.V.R. SARMA Appellant

V/S

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALCUM LABOUR COURT NO.2 Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

S.J.T. HOUSE VS. C.I.,SHOPS & ESTABLISHMENTS [REFERRED TO]
ROYAL TALKIES,HYDERABAD VS. E.S.I. CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK CANTEEN WORKERS' UNION (CALCUTTA) [REFERRED TO]
HUSSAINBHAI CALICUT VS. ALATH FACTORY THEZHILALI UNION KOZHIKODE [REFERRED TO]
AIR INDIA LIMITED VS. NERGESH MEERZA [REFERRED TO]
P M PATEL AND SONS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
M M R KHAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
R K PANDA VS. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. UMADEVI [REFERRED TO]
CANTEEN MAZDOOR SABHA VS. METALLURGICAL ENGG CONSULTANTS INDIA LTD [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR HORTICULTURE PUNJAB VS. JAGJIVAN PARSHAD [REFERRED TO]
G M ONGC SHILCHAR VS. ONGC CONTRACTUAL WORKERS UNION [REFERRED TO]
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR VS. DAYANAND [REFERRED TO]
MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. CASTERIBE RAJYA P KARMCHARI SANGHATANA [REFERRED TO]
B V NAGESH VS. H V SREENIVASA MURTHY [REFERRED TO]
RAMBHAU JAIRAM DHAMANGE VS. PRESIDENT VINKAR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD [REFERRED TO]
JANBA DAULATRAO BORKAR VS. RAJESH KUMAR RAMJIWAN AGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
MAHARASHTRA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION VS. GLASS CONTAINERS PVT LTD [REFERRED TO]
TUMKUR POURA KARMIKARA SANGHA VS. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
UTTAM VS. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, DARWHA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner - Trade Union has challenged the Award dated 2-5-1997 delivered by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Mumbai, in Reference No. CGIT2/68 of 92 answering the reference made at their instance in negative. The reference as made on 10-12-1992 reads as under :

(2.) The reference was sought by the petitioner about workers in Canteen at Taroda Opencast Coalmine. The mine is one of the mines owned and managed by National Coal Limited i.e. Coal India Limited. The operations there started in the year 1987 and with a view to make canteen facility available to employees working therein, a contractor came to be appointed by an order dated 16-3-1989. Contractor engaged certain workmen and their names have been shown in schedule appended to reference. Those names also include name of Contractor himself as worker at Sr. No. 1. They started working from March, 1989 and their wages were paid every month in presence of a Welfare Officer of Taroda Opencast mine. They approached Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) with contention that engagement of contractor v/as in violation of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1947, and also all provisions of

(3.) I have heard Shri Pendharkar, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Belsare, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Badar, learned Advocate for respondent No. 2 - employer.

Click here to view full judgment.

WORKMEN OF TARODA OPENCAST MINE OF WESTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED Vs. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address