MAMTA Vs. GOVT. OF NCT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MA 888/2014 and MA 1571/2014 Misc. Applications filed under Section 4(5) of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987 for joining together in single original application are not opposed, thus the same are allowed.

(2.) WE heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record. It is not in dispute that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi has outsourced the work performed by applicants to the contractors and the applicants were engaged through the contractors to provide contractual service to respondent No. 2. In other words, these are the contractors who have been assigned the contract from time to time to discharge the contractual work as per the terms and conditions of the contract and the services of the applicants herein are utilized by them to perform their contract. The applicants are not the employees of respondents No. 1 and 2. These are the contractors only who can be said to be providing the services to respondents No. 1 and 2 and the applicants cannot be said to be either holding any post or rendering any service in connection with the affairs of respondents No. 1 and 2. As has been ruled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.K. Panda v. Steel Authority of India, : (1994) 5 SCC 304 : LNIND 1994 SC 516, whether the contract labourers have become the employees of the principal employer in course of time and whether the engagement and employment of labourers through a contractor is a mere camouflage and a smokescreen, is a question of fact and has to be established by the contract labourers on the basis of requisite material and it is not possible for Hon'ble High Court or the Supreme Court, while exercising writ jurisdiction or jurisdiction under Article 136 to decide such questions only on the basis of the affidavits. In terms of the view taken by Hon'ble Supreme Court in said case, at what point of time a direct link is established between the contract labourers and the principal employer, eliminating the contract from the scene, is a matter which has to be established on material produced before the Court and normally the Labour Court and the Industrial Tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act are the competent fora to adjudicate such disputes on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence produced before them. Para 6 and 7 of the judgment read as under:

(3.) PARA 801(b) defines 'Regimental Fund" to mean comprising all funds, other than public funds maintained by a Unit.