BUTCHI REDDY K Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against a judgment dated June 16, 2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in OS No. 261 of 1999 whereby and whereunder the petitioners' application was dismissed. Bereft of all the unnecessary details, the basic fact of the matter is as follows:

(2.) A notification purported to be under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (the Act, for brevity) was issued on or about December 9, 1976, which is to the following effect:

(3.) A contractor was appointed by the Defence Research Development Laboratory (DRDL, for short). The petitioners, who are 59 in number, along with others appear to have been appointed by the Contractor in the year 1986. The petitioners filed an application before the learned Tribunal in terms of Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act praying for a direction to the respondents to absorb them as regular employees of the DRDL with effect from the date of their respective joining in services. The learned Tribunal inter alia held that (1) there is no relationship of master and servant between the Laboratory and the applicants; (2) as they have been working since 1986 onwards, a presumption must be raised that the Contractor was appointed in relation to the work which comes within the purview of the proviso appended to the aforementioned notification dated December 9, 1976; and (3) in a decision of this Court dated December 21, 1999 in W.P. No. 15186 of 1999 while setting aside an order of the Tribunal in M. Sudhakar Reddy v. Union of India, in OA No.1485 of 1996 dated December 9, 1998, it was directed that: