MANMATHA KUMAR JENA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against the judgment and order of the learned Trial Judge by which the writ petition has been dismissed. By the writ petition, the petitioners (appellants before us) approached for relief asking the appropriate Government viz. Central Government to refer the dispute.

(2.) The case of the appellants/writ petitioners is that they were engaged in doing perennial works for maintaining and beautification of a garden controlled by the Coal India Limited. It is true, their appointment was through contractor, but for long years they have been serving without any break and if it is examined properly then it will appear that they were actually maintained by Coal India Limited. Therefore, the matter was initially referred for conciliation proceedings.

(3.) The Conciliating Officer, after hearing both the Coal India Limited as well as the appellants before us. could not resolve the dispute and came to the finding that the dispute between the parties remained inconclusive. The Conciliating Officer has recorded that stand of the respondent Coal India Limited was that it did never engage the appellants gainfully, rather their service was voluntary in nature and that too through contractor. Moreover, the garden is owned by Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Coal India Limited has merely taken over it for maintenance and beautification. Therefore, there cannot be any master and servant relationship between the Coal India Limited and the appellants.