NALCO WORKERS UNION Vs. ASST LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have repeatedly observed that bad cases stand on the way of disposal of good cases. The present case is a glaring example and an illustration for the said proposition. Nalco Workers Union has filed the present writ petition praying for the following reliefs:

(2.) THE sole opposite party is the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Angul. We have perused the writ petition and also perused the impugned order, copy whereof is Annexure 7. The Workers' Union has highlighted the demand for abolition of contract Labour system, regularisation by the principal employer and for bonus. These three demands cannot be considered by the Conciliation Officer. There is specific forum for consideration as to abolition of contract labour system by the Central Government taking note of several factors. If there are contractor's employees and there is no abolition, no scope is there for regularisation. Demand for payment of bonus by the principal employer to the employee of the contractors also does not arise. Our attention is drawn to a decision reported in R. K. Panda and others v. Steel Authority of India and others 1994 (69) FLR 256 (SC ). In particular pur attention is drawn to paragraph-7 of the said decision. For better appreciation, paragraph-7 is quoted hereinbelow:

(3.) WE have repeatedly asked the learned counsel for the petitioner Union that the conciliation officer by his reasoned order has disposed of the matter holding that it is not within his domain of consideration. Learned counsel for the Union has not appreciated and he insisted that Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act is a mandate for the Conciliation Officer to conciliate whatever grievance is made. According to him, the conciliation officer is the labour forum and he is competent to consider the charter of demands.