LAWS(MPH)-1996-4-56

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD Vs. I RAMENAYYA

Decided On April 15, 1996
STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD Appellant
V/S
I RAMENAYYA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been tiled under clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 12-12-1995 of the learned Single Judge of this Court passed in M. P. No. 204/92. Some of the Societies which were respondents in the said petition have also filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 209/95 feeling aggrieved by the very same order. This judgment shall, therefore, govern the disposal of L. P. A. No. 209/95 as well.

(2.) THE appellant No. 1, Bhilai Steel Plant is a cluster of 53 departments or shops where each such shops is separately registered as a factory under the factories Act, 1948 under a separate licence. Out of these shops 25 employ workers exceeding 250 in number of which list has been appended to the memo of appeal as Annexure P. 2. Yet there are 17 other such departments employing less than 250 workers which have non-statutory canteens of which list his been furnished as Annexure P. 3. Some canteens are located within the works premises while some are outside the premises. A list of the canteens is also appended.

(3.) IT is not disputed that these canteens whether statutory or non-statutory are being managed by societies registered under the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act having their approved bye-laws which include the power to appoint and dismiss the employees of the societies. The canteens are managed through the instrumentality of these societies though, according to the appellants, they are run by them in accordance with the M. P. Factories rules, 1962 as independent bodies. Reference has been made by the appellants to the registered bye-laws of the societies particularly to bye-law 23 providing for the meeting of the general body, bye-law 28, providing for the constitution of the managing committee of the society, bye-law 33, prescribing functions of the managing committee with particular reference to clause 22 thereof with regard to the preparation of the estimates of canteens run by the individual society in support of the claim that the persons engaged by these societies were, at all times, treated to be the employees of their respective society and on several occasions, revision of pay of these employees had also been arrived at between the employees and the societies concerned and burden of payment to them had always been shouldered by the societies. It was only after the decision of the Apex Court in M. M. R. Khan vs. Union of india, AIR 1990 SC 937 that a wave trigerred in them to lay a claim to their being the employees of the appellant No. 1 and to seek parity with the employees of the said appellant.