Back
2001 Supreme(AP) 101
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : S.B.SINHA, S.R.NAYAK
Workmen, represented by Struggle Committee of A.P.S.E.Board Workers Union - Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-1 - Respondent
Decided On : 02-05-01
Headnote:
Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) act, 1970, - Section 10 – Industrial dispute – It having regard to fact that no notification in terms has been issued and also fact that members of appellant - Union have failed to prove by adducing cogent evidence that respondent Board was in pith and substance their employer – Held, Court of opinion that question of granting any relief in their favour for absorption in Board service does not arise having regard to decision of Apex Court - Union of India further more continuation in service for a number of years does not change status of person in view of decision in State and Others – Appeal dismissed
( 1 ) HAVING regard to the fact that no notification in terms of Section 10 (1) of the contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) act, 1970, has been issued, and also the fact that the members of the appellant - Union have failed to prove by adducing cogent evidence that the respondent No. 2 Board was, in pith and substance, their employer, we are of the opinion that the question of granting any relief in their favour for absorption in the Board s service does not arise having regard to the decision of the Apex Court in Gammon India ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1974 SC 961 : 1974 (1) SCC 596 : 1974-I-LLJ-489 : Further more, the continuation in service for a number of years does not change the status of person in view of the decision in State of M. P. and Others v. Dharam Bir, 1998 (6) SCC 165 : 1998- ii-LLJ-666.
( 2 ) FOR the aforementioned reasons, we dismiss the writ appeal. No costs.
