Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1959 Supreme(Cal) 205

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
D. N. SINHA, J.
Kesab Lal Banerjee
Versus
Calcutta Dock Labour Board
Matter No.61 of 1959
Decided On : 10-09-1959

Advocates:
S.K. Acharya, for Petitioners; S.K. Mookerjee, for Respondents.

All employers of dock workers, not just stevedores, are required to be registered under the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1956.

Headnote:
DOCK WORKERS - REGULATION OF EMPLOYMENT - REGISTRATION OF EMPLOYERS - INTERPRETATION OF SCHEME - WHO IS AN EMPLOYER - WHETHER TALLY CLERK CONTRACTORS ARE STEVEDORES - ENTITLEMENT TO REGISTRATION AS EMPLOYERS - CALCUTTA DOCK WORKERS (REGULATION OF EMPLOYMENT) SCHEME, 1956, CLAUSES 15, 16.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, tally clerk contractors, sought registration as employers under the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1956. The Dock Labour Board denied their application, contending that only stevedores could be registered as employers. The petitioners challenged this decision, arguing that they were not stevedores and were entitled to registration as employers.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioners were not stevedores but were employers of dock workers and were entitled to registration as employers under the Scheme. The court interpreted the Scheme to mean that all employers of dock workers, not just stevedores, were required to be registered.
Issues: 1. Whether tally clerk contractors are stevedores. 2. Whether only stevedores can be registered as employers under the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1956. 3. Whether the petitioners were entitled to registration as employers under the Scheme.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that tally clerk contractors are not stevedores. It relied on the definitions of "stevedore" in various dictionaries and concluded that a stevedore is a person whose duty is to undertake the stowage or discharge of cargoes with a gang of men whom he hires and pays and is responsible for their work. The court found that the petitioners, in so far as they carry on as tally clerk contractors, merely supply tally clerks to ships and have nothing to do with the loading and unloading of cargoes or the stowage or discharge of cargoes in relation to ships. 2. The court held that the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1956 does not restrict registration as employers to stevedores only. It interpreted clause 15 of the Scheme, which deals with the maintenance of the employers register, to mean that all employers of dock workers, not just stevedores, are entitled to registration. The court noted that the Scheme does not define the word "stevedore" and that the word "employer" is defined broadly to include any person by whom a dock worker is employed or to be employed. 3. The court held that the petitioners were entitled to registration as employers under the Scheme. It found that the petitioners are employers of dock workers and that they are not stevedores. Therefore, the conditions and restrictions imposed on stevedores in the Scheme do not apply to them.
Final Decision: The court made absolute the rule issued to the Dock Labour Board and directed it to deal with the petitioners' application for registration within a reasonable time and in accordance with law, on the footing that the petitioners are not stevedores but are employers of dock workers and are entitled to registration.

JUDGMENT :- There are two petitioners before me, Kesab Lal Bannerjee and Hiralal Bannerjee, Their father, Monilal Bannerjee, carried on business as a supplier of tally clerks to ships that call at the Port of Calcutta. He had been carrying on this business ever since 1918. After his death in 1939, his business was continued by the petitioners who are two brothers under the firm name of "M. L. Bannerjee and Sons". As such, they have also been carrying on business as supplier of tally clerks to ships that call at the Port of Calcutta. The way that the business is carried on is that the petitioners employ a number of tally clerks, whom they supply to ships according to their requirements. In the year 1948, was enacted the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 being Central Act IX of 1948. This Act was promulgated to provide for regulating the employment of dock workers. The Act contemplates the drawing up of a scheme for the registration of dock workers, with a view to ensuring greater regularity of employment and for regulating the employment of dock workers, whether registered or not, in a Port. In exercise of the powers conferred by the Act, the Central Government, in or about October, 1951, framed a Scheme called the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme 1951. This Scheme was intended to apply to the Port of Calcutta and to classes or description of dock work and workers set out in the Schedule annexed thereto. This Scheme was subsequently replaced by another Scheme called the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme 1956. This is the Scheme now in operation. Before I proceed further it will be necessary to consider some of the provisions of the Act and the two Schemes hereinbefore mentioned. Clause (b) of Sec. 2 of the said Act defines a "dock worker" to be a person employed or to be employed in, or in the vicinity of, any port, or work in connection with the loading, unloading, movement or storage of cargoes, or work in connection with the preparation of ships and other vessels for the receipt or discharge of cargoes or leaving port. Clause (c) defines the word "employer" as follows : "(c) employer, in relation to a dock worker means a person by whom he is employed or to be employed as aforesaid;" Section 5 of the Act provides for the constitution of an Advisory Committee consisting of an equal number of members representing Government, dock workers, and the employers of dock workers. Coming now to the Scheme of 1951, we find that under cl. 4 has been established a Board called the "Calcutta Dock Labour Board", which is a body responsible for the administration of the scheme. The Board was to consist of 12 members, to be appointed by the Central Government, and was to include an equal number of members representing Government, clock workers and employers of dock workers and shipping companies. Clause 3 contains certain definitions. The following definitions are important :

"(f) dock employer means the person by whom a dock worker is employed or is to be employed;

(g) dock work means operations at places or premises to which the Scheme relates, ordinarily performed by dock workers of the classes or descriptions to which the Scheme applies;

(h) employers register means the register of dock employers maintained under the Scheme;

(i) registered employer means a dock employer whose name is for the time being entered in the employers register;"

2. Clause 10 speaks about the maintenance of registers. There appears to be two classes of registers, one the employers register and the second is the workers register. Its corresponding clause in the 1956 Scheme which is of great importance in this application will be dealt with under that scheme.

3. It will thus be seen that the scheme envisages two kinds of registration. One is the registration of the employers of the dock workers and the other is the registration of the dock workers themselves. So far as the workers are concerned, clause 11 of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

1959 Supreme(Cal) 205

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTAD. N. SINHA, J.Kesab Lal BanerjeeVersusCalcutta Dock Labour BoardMatter No.61 of 1959Decided On : 10-09-1959

All employers of dock workers, not just stevedores, are required to be registered under the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1956.

Judicial Analysis

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
D. N. SINHA, J.
Kesab Lal Banerjee
Versus
Calcutta Dock Labour Board
Matter No.61 of 1959
Decided On : 10-09-1959