EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF BHURANGIYA PROJECT OF BHARAT COKING COAL LTD Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO 1

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application, the petitioner, who is Employer in relation to the Management of Bhurangiya Project of Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad, has challenged the award dated June 29, 1990 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 in Reference Case No. 77 of 1983, whereby and whereunder the Tribunal held that the action of the Management in not regularising the concerned workmen and not paying them the scale of wages as per the National Coal Wage Agreement (NCWA)-II is not justified. By the said Award, the Management has been directed to regularise the concerned workmen in service and to pay them wages as per NCWA-II and 50% back wages with effect from the date of reference i.e., November 14/17, 1983.

(2.) It appears that by order dated November 14/17, 1983, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour, in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute to the Industrial Tribunal for an adjudication.

(3.) From the list annexed with the order of reference, it appears that the reference was in respect of 105 workmen who are stated to have been the workmen in the Bhurangia Project of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited. The case of the concerned workmen before the Tribunal was that they had been working as underground stonecutters and doing miscellaneous job against, permanent vacancies since long with unblemished record of service; they had been working as underground workmen and performing the job of permanent nature under the direct control and supervision of the colliery management. They have rendered services for the benefit of the colliery management. The workmen's further case was that all implements for execution of job, such as caplamps, torches, shoes, belts, explosives, hammers, stone-pits are supplied by the colliery management. According to the workmen, as per the Mines Act and the rules & regulations, all underground workmen are legally bound to work under the direct control and supervision of the competent authority; for all purposes, the concerned workmen should be legally deemed to be the employees of Bhurangiya Project. It was further stated that the management has been disbursing wages through different intermediaries as contractors. The disbursements of wages through so called contractor(s) are nothing, but a legal camouflage. The concerned workmen and the Union on their behalf represented before the management to regularise them as permanent employees of Bhurangiya Project, but the anti-labour management refused to settle the dispute amicably due to biased attitude against the members of the Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union. The workmen claimed regularisation of their service and payment of wages as per NCWA-II. The case of the management was that the persons concerned never worked either as stone-cutters or against permanent vacancies and that they have not been performing the job of permanent nature. The management's further case was that tools and supplements were not supplied to the contractors and to the concerned persons. The use of cap lamps while moving underground is a statutory requirement and the same is supplied to any person going underground, whether employees of the colliery management or a contractor's workman. The persons concerned were the employees/ workmen of the contractors and were being paid by the contractors. The management also challenged the legality and validity of the reference and stated that the Centra! Government has got no jurisdiction to make reference. It was further stated that the identity of the persons concerned have not been disclosed at all and the concerned persons in the present reference were, in no way, connected with the raising of coal or any work connected with the mining operation and there existed no employer-employee relationship between the persons concerned and the management, i.e. the employer of Bhurangiya Project. The further case of the management was that in course of renovation and widening of the diameter of the pit civil work construction of ventilation, stopping isolation, making drains, lane foundation for the machinery and others, both underground and on the surface, which has got nothing to do with the production of coal, was undertaken and some contractors were engaged. Work carried out by the contractors was temporary in nature and has since come to an end. It was further stated that the contractors were not employed in any work incidental to or connected with the mining operation, and subsequently, the persons, who were allegedly employed through contractors were not employed in any kind of work incidental to or connected with the mining operation.