BHARTIYA KAMGAR SENA Vs. UDHE INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these Petitions can be disposed of by a common order since the parties to both these Petitions have challenged the common order which is passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (IT) No. 43 of 2002.

(2.) The Industrial Court partly allowed the Reference and directed the appropriate Government to take necessary action under section 10 (1) , (2) (a) to (d) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as "clra Act") within a reasonable period. The Tribunal held that the contract which was entered into between the Contractor and the Company was not sham and bogus but was a genuine contract. However, on the basis of other material on record, it directed the appropriate Government to take necessary action under the aforesaid provisions of the CLRA Act.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the directions given by the Industrial Court to the appropriate Government to take action under the provisions of section 10 (1) (2) (a) to (d) of the CLRA Act, the Company filed Writ Petition No. 486 of 2005. The union, on the other hand, has filed Writ Petition No. 2527 of 2004, challenging the findings recorded by the Industrial Court, wherein, it held that the workmen were not employees of the Company and were not entitled to get status of permanency and further held that the contract between the Company and the contractor was not sham and bogus. Facts :