Back
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Food Corporation of India Workers Union – Appellant
Versus
Food Corporation of India – Respondent
ORDER:
1. The facts, as projected in the Writ Affidavit, in brief, are;
a. Petitioner is Food Corporation of India Workers’ Union, which is a registered Trade Union filed the W.P. on behalf of 751 ‘Direct Payment System’[In short, DPS] workers engaged in the Respondent No.1 for handling foodgrains in their depots. Respondent No.3 entrusted the Respondent No.1 with a duty to procure food grains and carry out its movement and distribution throughout the country by loading and unloading, through skilled labour. Pursuant to the long-standing demand for absorption and permanence, a settlement was arrived between the Petitioner Union and the Respondent No.1 management, vide the Memorandum of Settlement dated 01.11.1994.
b. A circular dated 05.12.1994 was issued by the Respondent No.1 to recognize the rights of the handling labourers, commonly identified as DPS. These labourers are posted in various depots/godowns of respondent No.1 and at various railway sidings for the purpose of unloading food grain stock and stacking them at the siding godown before dispatch.
c. Thereafter, Respondent No.1 issued a circular dated 22.07.1996 to the Zonal Manager with certain conditions to improve the labou
The transfer of Direct Payment System workers is lawful under the provisions of the Contract Labour Act, ensuring minimum wages and service benefits are maintained.
The exemption under the Contract Labour Act is valid, allowing the Food Corporation to engage contract labour and transfer DPS workers, affirming the authority of the employer in service matters.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; absence of a defined transfer policy renders such orders arbitrary, necessitating formulation of a policy.
The court affirmed the validity of the exemption notification permitting contract labour in the FCI, highlighting adherence to previous judicial rulings as a matter of legal discipline.
Point of law: Exemption notifications under Section 31 of the Act, which are temporary, issued for an emergent purpose, cannot dilute the rigour of a Section 10 notification.
Exemption notifications under Section 31 of the Act, which are temporary, issued for an emergent purpose, cannot dilute the rigour of a Section 10 notification.
Contract labour cannot be employed in establishments under Section 10 of the Act; transferring employees for this purpose violates legal provisions.
The court established that employees must be treated equally regarding regularization under the Direct Payment System based on prior tribunal awards and statutory provisions.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
