KARANTIKARI SURAKSHA RAKSHAK SANGHATANA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three Writ Petitions are filed by three different Trade Unions but all of them pray that the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) (Amendment) Act, 1996 be declared to be illegal and unconstitutional and be struck down.

(2.) The main submissions of the petitioners - Trade Unions to put in a nutshell are twofold. (i) The first submission is that under the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) (Amendment) Act, 1981 ("the said Act" for short), as it stood prior to this amendment and as it was interpreted by the Courts, the agencies or the contractors were not permitted to provide the Security Guards and that the employment of the Security Guards who were not the direct employees of the factories or establishments, had to be provided only by the Board constituted under the said Act. It is their contention that this amending Act brings back and permits the agencies or the contractors to provide the Security Guards. The amendment is sought to be challenged as being a retrograde piece of legislation and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being contrary to the directive principles contained in Articles 38, 39, 41, 42, 43 and 46 of the Constitution of India. (ii). It is their further contention that the amending Act is repugnant to the provisions contained in the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. This Act is an earlier law made by the Parliament and it occupies the same field and since no assent of the President of India has been obtained to this amending Act, the same be declared as unconstitutional on the touchstone of Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Since the validity of this amending Act of the State is challenged, the State of Maharashtra is joined as the principal respondent to these three Petitions. The Security Guards Board constituted under Section 6 of the said Act is also joined as a respondent. Some of the contracting agencies and the principal employers are joined as additional respondents. The State Government has filed the Affidavits in reply to these Petitions. Submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, the State Government as well as the principal employers and the contracting agencies as also some of the interveners such as particular principal employers and contracting agencies have all been heard through their Counsel.