STATE Vs. SUPER POWER CONTRACTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State represented by Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), Hyderabad preferred this revision case challenging the order of the XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad dated 31-1-2002 in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.2090 of 2001 in S.T.C. No.1873 of 2000.

(2.) The first respondent is a firm undertaking certain contract works under the State and Central Government establishments. S.T.C. No.1873 of 2000 was filed against the first respondent under Section 23 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (for short 'the Act') for breach of Section 12(1) of the Act on the ground that it undertook the contract work of Jet Airways Limited without obtaining licence from the competent authority. The complainant-State alleged that the first respondent undertook the contract work of aircraft cleaning, loading and unloading of Cargo, driving, sweeping and cleaning etc., of Jet Airways Limited, Hyderabad by engaging 104 labour to attend those works without obtaining licence from the competent authority to undertake those works. During the pendency of the case, the first respondent filed Criminal Misc. Petition No.2090 of 2001 under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. for discharge. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate ordered its discharge observing that the revision petitioner-State has no authority to initiate the proceedings against the first respondent as the Central Government is not the appropriate Government in respect of the first respondent organization. The revision petitioner being aggrieved by the order of discharge passed by the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate has preferred this revision case challenging its validity and legality.

(3.) The revision petitioner contended that the Central Government is the appropriate Government as per Section 2(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act in respect of the establishment in Air Transport Services. The lower Court failed to observe that Jet Airways is the principal employer and the first respondent is the contractor for loading and unloading of the luggage of the passengers at airport, therefore, it has to obtain licence under the Act from the Central Government. Since the first respondent did not obtain licence from the licencing authority of the Central Government, it is a clear violation under Section 12(a) of the Act.