LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions raise common question of law, as such, they have been heard together and disposed of by common order.

(2.) The challenge made in the writ petitions is to the orders/decisions of respondents 1 and 2 to charge 1% of the value of the contracts entered by petitioners with third respondent to undertake design, manufacture, supply, erect, testing and commissioning of blast furnace-3 including civil and structural works as cess under "The Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996" (Act 28 of 1996).

(3.) For convenience sake facts and material papers in W.P.No.9111 of 2010 are considered. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (third respondent) is a factory registered under the Indian Factories Act, 1948 (for short the Act, 1948). In order to expand its operations and increase the production capacity third respondent obtained necessary permissions to establish another blast furnace. This expansion required design, manufacture, supply, erect, testing and commissioning of blast furnace-3 inclusive of civil and structural works and all facilities. For this purpose third respondent entered into agreements with the petitioners. Petitioners have executed the works in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The Commissioner of Labour (first respondent) held that petitioners are governed by Act Nos. 27 and 28 of 1996, determined amount payable as cess under Act 28 of 1996 and demanded the amount quantified and issued incidental directions. One such demand notice is filed as Annexure P-9 to W.P.No.9111 of 2010. Consequently, similar demand is made by Joint Commissioner for Labour (second respondent) in March, 2010. One such demand notice is filed as Annexure P-14 to W.P.No.9111 of 2010. The first and second respondents directed the third respondent to deduct 1% of the amount payable to the petitioners and remit the same to the Government towards cess payable under the Act 28 of 1996. In terms of the said mandate of the first and second respondents, third respondent deducted 1% contractual amount from the amounts payable to the contractors. Said orders of the first and second respondents are under challenge in this batch of writ petitions.