PASCHIM BANGA Vs. UNION OF IINDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned advocates for the contesting respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner's case very briefly is that the petitioners have been working for last 15 years (writ petition was filed in the year 2003) under the respondent No. 4 as contract labour and the petitioners were employed for the purpose of business of the respondent No. 2, that is, reserve Bank of India. The petitioner's case is that the petitioners were engaged for the purpose of loading and unloading and despatch of reserve Bank's coins and currency notes and the petitioner had to move this Court in writ jurisdiction and ultimately by an order dated 19. 12. 2001 an Hon'ble single Judge of this Court in C. O. No. 15517 (W)of 1993 was pleased to dispose of the writ petition with a direction upon the Reserve Bank of India to forward the matter to the Central government within a stipulated period and the Central Government was also directed to finalise the issue upon giving fullest opportunity of hearing and by passing a reasoned order thereon within a stipulated period in the light of the Judgment and order passed by the Court. It appears that at the time of delivering of the said Judgment the learned counsel for the petitioner contended before the Court that seven workers have already been ousted and the Hon'ble single Judge was pleased to observe that since the writ petition has already been disposed of, ousting of service of the workers shall abide by the result of the decision to be taken by the authority concerned pursuant to the order of the Court. It appears that the petitioner had challenged an order dated 29th March, 1992 issued by the respondent No. 3 whereby it was observed that no case was made out to prohibit the contract Labour under section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 in respect of loading and unloading or other specified operations relating to coin boxes/currency notes of the Reserve Bank of India's office at Calcutta. It appears that in the previous writ proceeding a dispute was raised by the parties as to whether or not the job is of perennial nature and also whether the number of labourers involved was less than 20 or not. It also appears that there was dispute as to whether the labourers were required for the whole day or not and as to whether the labourers were required every day or not. The Hon'ble single Judge was pleased to hold after considering the submissions made by the parties, that the decision of the Governmental authority was wrong and such decision by the Governmental authority was set aside and the aforesaid order was passed on 19. 12. 2001 as already indicated above.

(3.) IT appears from a letter dated 13th May, 2003 issued by the ministry of Labour, Government of India that the matter along with the report of the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central ). Kolkata was placed before the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board and it was considered by the Board and the Board constituted a committee to study the matter in details. That such committee submitted its report. The report of the committee was circulated to the Board Members for obtaining their views with the approval of the Chairman of the Board and the majority of the Board Members accepted the recommendation of the committee. It appears that the committee concluded that the factors contemplated in section 10 (2) (b) (c) (d) of the said Act of 1970 were not fulfilled and recommended that there did not exist sufficient ground for prohibition of employment of Contract Labour under section 10 (1)of the said Act of 1970 in the jobs/works of loading, unloading, re-stacking, shifting and despatching operations relating to coin bags and currency note boxes in the establishment of Reserve Bank of India, kolkata. It was further mentioned in the said notice dated 13th May, 2003 that pursuant to the recommendation of the Board the matter was considered in details by the Central Government having regard to the conditions of work and benefits provided to contract labour and other relevant factors enunciated in the said Act of 1970 and the Central government has come to the conclusion that such contract workmen have worked only for a short duration and there seems to be no scope to employ whole-time workmen on such jobs on regular basis as the number of days for which the contract workers had been engaged were less than 240 days in a year and ,the requirements of section 10 (2) of the said Act of 1970 are not fulfilled. In the said notice it was further stated that decision has been taken to accept the recommendations of the Board and not to prohibit employment of contract labour in such jobs in the establishment of Reserve Bank of India, Kolkata for which the appropriate Government under the said Act of 1970 is the Central government.