2024 Supreme(Cal) 786
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
KRISHNA RAO, J.
Damodar Valley Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Labour Commissioner, Bankura & Ors. – Respondents
WPA 16561 of 2003
Decided on : 18-01-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Ranjay De, Mr. B. Banerjee, Mr. A. A. Bose
The importance of evidence and due process in labor disputes, the significance of maintaining status quo, and the implications of government notifications prohibiting the employment of contract labour.
Headnote:
Payment of Wages Act - Dispute over payment of wages to labourers engaged by the petitioner - Act Section List: Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 - The court discussed the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. The court emphasized the importance of maintaining status quo and the implications of the notification issued by the Government of India prohibiting the employment of contract labour in specific establishments. The judgment also referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Steel Authority of India Limited and another Vs. National Union Waterfront Workers and others (2001) 7 SCC 1.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Damodar Valley Corporation, was in a dispute over the payment of wages to labourers engaged by them. The court analyzed the communications issued by the Assistant Labour Commissioner and the Labour Inspector and set them aside.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no evidence that the private respondents were engaged by the petitioner after the order of status quo was vacated by the Hon’ble Division Bench. The communications issued by the Assistant Labour Commissioner and the Labour Inspector were set aside and quashed.
Issues: Dispute over payment of wages, engagement of labourers, validity of communications issued by the Assistant Labour Commissioner and the Labour Inspector.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of evidence and due process in labor disputes. It highlighted the significance of maintaining status quo and the implications of the notification issued by the Government of India prohibiting the employment of contract labour in specific establishments.
Final Decision: The communication dated 6th May, 2003 issued by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Bankura and the communication dated 11th July, 2003 issued by the Labour Inspector, Bankura are set aside and quashed. WPA No. 16561 of 2003 is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Krishna Rao, J.:
1. The petitioner, Damodar Valley Corporation has filed the present writ application against the communication dated 6th May, 2003 issued by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Bankura, State of West Bengal requesting the writ petitioner to pay all the dues payable to the private respondents under Section 3 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and the communication dated 11th July, 2003 issued by the Labour Inspector, Bankura threatening the petitioner for taking legal action for nonpayment of the wages to the private respondents under the provisions of Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
2. Damodar Valley Corporation generates and distributes electrical energy to the State of West Bengal and Jharkhand and Public Sectors like Coal India Limited, Eastern Coalfields Limited, SAIL, Railways, TISCO, CESC and other industries situated within the State of West Bengal and Jharkhand. The petitioner operates five numbers of Thermal Power Station, one Gas Turbine Project and three Hydel Power Stations. The petitioner has undertaken construction of Mejia Thermal Power Station (herein referred to as “MTPS”) to the rural areas of Bankura, Purulia for industrial development as well as for the benefit of agriculture in rural areas. The MTPS was having three units of 210 NW each. For the said purpose land was acquired through the State Government after payment of due compensation to the State Government.
3. As per the meeting held between the Government of West Bengal and the petitioner on 28th October, 1993, it was decided that 500 to 520 persons who are the land losers category will be appointed and the District Magistrate, Bankura, was authorized to process the panel from amongst land losers based on the criteria fixed by the petitioner. In between 24th April, 1991 to 28th April, 1995, the petitioner entered into a contract with five different contractors for the purpose of arranging supply of water in the project as temporary arrangement, till the development of permanent infrastructure. On 1st September, 1996, an agreement was entered with the labour contractors for providing water by operating pumps and about 18 labourers were engaged by the labour contractors for operation of 14 pumps which were installed as a temporary measure till the completion of permanent water supply system for Damodar River. The petitioner has made all the payments to the labour contractors in terms of the agreement.
4. The labourers of the contractors have filed a writ petition before this Court being C.O No. 17150 (w) of 1996 before this Court for their absorption on permanent basis as pump and valve operator. This Court had disposed of the writ petition by an order dated 13th December, 1996 directing the petitioner to maintain status quo as regard the service of the labourers till the proceeding under Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 was disposed of by the State Government. Being aggrieved with the said order, the petitioner has preferred an appeal being FMAT No. 4311 of 1996 and the Hon’ble Division Bench had set aside the order passed by this Court and remanded the matter back for fresh consideration and directed to maintain status quo for two weeks.
5. After remand, this Court had disposed of the writ application after exchange of pleadings on 29th November, 1999 wherein this Court directed the petitioner to frame a Scheme so that all the persons including the writ petitioners can be absorbed and employed in such posts with the utmost expedition. Till such absorption is made, status quo shall be maintained. Being aggrieved with the order passed by this Court, the petitioner had preferred an appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the Government of India has issued a Notification dated 28th February, 2001 under sub Section 1 of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 wherein it prohibits the employment of contract labour in the job or works specified in the establishments of M