JUDGMENT - MHATRE NISHITA, J.:—This petition challenges the Award Part II dated 18th August, 1995 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay in Reference (IT) No. 44 of 1993 rejecting the reference on the ground that the petitioner Union was not able to establish the master and servant relationship between the workmen represented by the petitioner and respondent No. 1 herein. The entire dispute has arisen on account of the services of the workmen represented by the petitioner Union being terminated. For the sake of brevity, the petitioner Union is referred to as "Union" and respondent No. 1 company as "company".

2.The entire reference was in respect of about 30 workmen involved in the dispute. The Union represent the employees who are called retainers by the company. These employees sought permanent absorption and other reliefs from the company. The company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling and servicing of electronic items mainly Televisions. Between the years 1972 and 1978, the company engaged these 30 persons as Technicians initially on a contract basis for a period of four years. Some of these Technicians were then made permanent as Tradesman or Scientific

Click Here to Read the rest of this document