SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 217

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J.
Mc. Nally Bharat Engineering Company Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
The Commissioner of Labour - Respondent
Writ Petition No.18641 of 2011
Decided On : 01-02-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: G. V. S. Ganesh.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Companies Act, 1956 - Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 - Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 - Contract agreement - Bidder - Petitioner is a company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office - It is engaged in providing turnkey solutions in areas of Power, Steel, Aluminum, Material Handling, Mineral Beneficiation, Pyro-processing, Pneumatic Handling of powdered materials, including fly ash handling and high concentrate disposal, coal washing, port cranes, civic and industrial water supply, etc,. Petitioner undertook and executed various works on Turnkey basis, including erection and commissioning of various mineral processing plants such as iron ore, Boxite, Dolonite, Coal, Rock Phospate, Gold, Uranium Ore etc. which involves crushing, grinding, neutral thickening, sand slime separation, tailing disposal, water, compressed air and allied system, which are peculiar to Metal and Steel Industries - Respondent No.3 herein is a Government of India undertaking established for carrying on mining uranium ore in country - Whether contract entered into by petitioner with 3rd respondent on 11.02.2008 would attract provisions of Acts 27 and 28 of 1996 and Rules made thereunder? - Held, in view of expressions above referred to supra, contention of the learned senior counsel that though word civil work is included in contract infact, petitioner did not execute any civil work falls to ground - If the information required by the 2nd respondent is made available, 2nd respondent will take a decision - Contract entered into by petitioner with 3rd respondent includes civil works - Court is not considering that aspect per incuriam in present writ petition - In view of discussion made supra, Court doesn't find any irregularity in issuing notice to the petitioner to submit information in Form-I - There are no merits in writ petition - However, in view of interim order, petitioner shall submit the relevant record as required to competent authority within a period of four weeks from date of receipt of copy of the order - If any information, as required, is furnished, it is needless to observe competent authority shall dispose of the same strictly in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner - Writ petition is dismissed.

ORDER :

1. The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

    “to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any appropriate Writ, Order or directiona) Declaring that the Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 and the Central and State Rules framed thereunder are not applicable to the work being carried out by the Petitioner herein under the agreements dated 11.02.2008 between the Respondent No.3 viz., the Manager (Personnel), Uranium Corporation of India Ltd., Thummalapalli Project (Post), Vemula (M), YSR District and the Petitioner; and consequently.

b) declaring that the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein viz., The Commissioner of Labour & the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Kadapa have no jurisdiction whatsoever and that no amount is payable to them towards cess under the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 and the Central and State Rules framed thereunder, while also declaring that the Notice No.A/373/2011, dated 20.04.2011 issued by Respondent No.2 viz., the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Kadapa as being void, nonPage est, invalid, enforceable and inoperative in law; and consequently.

c) Restrain the Respondents, their Officers and Staff, from enforcing the Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Services) Act, 1996, the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 and the Central and State Rules framed thereunder against the activities carried on by the Petitioner pertaining to erection and commissioning of Uranium Ore Mining Processing Project of the Respondent No.3 as awarded under the contract dated 11.02.2008; and

And pass such other order or orders ….”.

2. The averments, in brief, in the writ affidavit are:

Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata – 700 001. It is engaged in providing turnkey solutions in the areas of Power, Steel, Aluminum, Material Handling, Mineral Beneficiation, Pyro-processing, Pneumatic Handling of powdered materials, including fly ash handling and high concentrate disposal, coal washing, port cranes, civic and industrial water supply, etc,. Petitioner undertook and executed various works on Turnkey basis, including erection and commissioning of various mineral processing plants such as iron ore, Boxite, Dolonite, Coal, Rock Phospate, Gold, Uranium Ore etc. which involves crushing, grinding, neutral thickening, sand slime separation, tailing disposal, water, compressed air and allied system, which are peculiar to Metal and Steel Industries.

Respondent No.3 herein is a Government of India undertaking established for carrying on mining uranium ore in the country. Respondent No.3 invited sealed tender vide tender No.01 (UCTL-I), dated 17.02.2007 for design, engineering, planning, procurement, supply, manufacture/ fabrication, painting, erection, testing and inspection, commissioning and performance testing, complete in all aspects, on EPC/Turnkey basis, of all mechanical, electrical, civil, structural, architectural, air conditioning and ventilation, environmental, management, instrumentation and control with all equipment and accessories for the crushing, grinding, thickening, sand slime separation, tailing disposal, water, compressed air and allied systems having a capacity to treat 3000 MT/day of ore at the project site Tummalapalle, District Kadapa, AP. The writ petitioner participated in the bid and became successful bidder.

Subsequently on 11.02.2008, a contract agreement was entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.3. In accordance with the agreement works were executed.

While so, respondent No.3 addressed letter/notice Rc.No.A/367/2011, dated 28.04.2011, to the Manager (Personnel) of respondent

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top