IMPORTANT POINT
[The judgment establishes that for contract workers to claim rights under employment law, they must prove an employer-employee relationship with the principal employer, which includes satisfying specific legal tests regarding control, remuneration, and authority.]

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. These two Petitions are filed by contract workers of Kirloskar Ebara Pumps Ltd. challenging the common Award dtd. 6/11/2004 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Sangli, rejecting the respective References by holding that there is no employer-employee relationship between Petitioners and the Respondent and further holding that the respective contractors of the Petitioners were necessary parties to the References, in whose absence the References could not be adjudicated. The workers involved in Writ Petition No.4701 of 2005 were contract workers of M/s. Shree Datta Agencies, whereas the workers involved in Writ Petition No.4702 of 2005 were engaged by M/s. Allied Engineering Services. The workers however did not implead the said contractors nor sought any relief against them and therefore the Labour Court has held that adjudication of References relating to termination of the workers against RespondentKirloskar Ebara Pumps Ltd. was impermissible on account of absence of employer-employee relationship. The References are therefore held to be not maintainable and are accordingly rejected.

2. The factual background of the case is that - Respondent-Kirloskar Ebara Pumps Limited is engaged in manufacture and sale of pumps. It has its Head Office at Pune and factory at Sawantpur Vasahat, Kirloskarwadi, District Sangli. It is the case of the Petitioners that they were engaged by the Respondent since the year 1995 for performing various jobs in machine and assembly Sec. and that they performed work of perennial nature completing more than 240 days of service in each calendar year. That they were falsely shown to have been engaged through contractors even though the Respondent-Company used to directly control their service conditions as well as allotting work to them and supervising their work. It is their case that Petitioners in Writ Petition No.4701 of 2005 were illegally shown as workers of contractor M/s. Shree Datta Agencies whereas the Petitioners in Writ Petition No.4702 of 2005 were shown as workers engaged by the contractor M/s. Allied Engineering Services.

3. Since the workers were denied benefit of permanency, Complaint (ULP) No.699 of 2001 was filed before the Industrial Court, Kolhapur seeking permanency. In that Complaint, interim order was passed on 21/6/2001 directing the Respondent to maintain status quo with regard to services of the Petitioners. The Interim Application for stay was however rejected by Industrial Court, Kolhapur by order dtd. 27/8/2001. Immediately thereafter services of Petitioners were terminated by Respondent-Company on 29/8/2001. Later, the Industrial Court dismissed the Complaint (ULP) No.699 of 2001 holding that there was no employer-employee relationship between the Petitioners and Respondent.

4. Aggrieved by the terminations effected on 29/8/2001, Petitioners individually raised demands before Conciliation Officer under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. Upon failure of the conciliation proceedings, reference order was made by the appropriate Government about termination and reinstatement of Petitioners to Labour Court, Sangli. Petitioners accordingly filed their statements of claim before the Labour Court, Sangli. Petitioners also filed Interim Applications for seeking interim stay on termination. Respondent-Company resisted both by filing Reply to the Interim Applications as well as Written Statement to the Statements of Claim. Petitioners examined themselves as witnesses and the Respondent-Company also examined Mr. Anand Gumaste as its witness.

5. After considering the pleadings and evidence on record, the Labour Court delivered two separate Awards on 6/11/2004 and held that there was absence of employer-employee relationship between the Petitioners and Respondent-Company. It further held that the contractors Shree Datta Agencies and M/s. Allied Engineering Services were necessary parties, in whose absence, references could not be decided. All the references were th