ORDER :

1. Delay condoned.

2. On perusal of pleadings including the grounds raised in the special leave petitions, we cannot find anything to support the issue sought to be now raised before us by the learned counsel for the petitioner-State. The conspectus of the issue sought to be raised before us is that the amendment to the Act of 1958 of the State Legislature which received the President’s assent stands eclipsed after the enactment of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.

3. In terms of the amendment made, the definition of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the “ID Act”) substituted the words “employed in any industry” with the words “by an employer or by a contractor in relation to the execution of his contracts with such employer.” The endeavor appeared to be to amend the definition to include even the employees who were employed through contractors under the category of ‘Workman’ within the purview of the ID Act.

4. It is the say of the learned counsel for the petitioners that under Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India the Presidential assent has to be with regard to the law ‘already enacted’ by the Parliament or the ‘existing law’. H