Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)
Eastern Railway Quasi Employees Union, Asansol – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to tribunal award regarding canteen closure (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. assessment of employer-employee relationship and tribunal findings (Para 4 , 12) |
| 3. grounds for writ petition against tribunal's decision (Para 5) |
| 4. claims of quasi-employees for regularization in service (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. dismissal of writ petition and relevant orders (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
1. The writ application has been preferred challenging the award dated 13.02.2018 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal in Reference no. 99 of 2006.
2. The petitioners were all working as quasi-employees/workmen in the Non statutory recognized canteen under the name and style of Asansol Railwaymen's Cooperative stores Ltd. (Canteen) located in the Railway premises at Station road Asansol and at Hutton road Asansol.
3. The two wings of the said Canteen, one at Station Road, Asansol and the other at Hutton Road, Asansol was locked up by the Railway Management on 19.12.2005, forcibly, without notice and by assaulting the workmen working in the canteen engaging RPF Railways. This was because the quasi workers of the aforesaid wings of the said canteen were on re
There is no employer-employee relationship between the cooperative store workers and railway management, negating claims for regularization and statutory recognition as railway employees.
Employees of cooperative societies cannot be classified as Railway servants, as they operate under the cooperative law without Railway administrative control, thus not entitled to benefits reserved f....
The court established that for an employer-employee relationship to exist, there must be direct control and supervision over the workers, which was absent in this case.
Staff canteens operated for employees do not qualify as 'restaurants' under the Act, thus are exempt from its provisions.
Court affirmed petitioners' entitlement to benefits under a prior settlement, emphasizing the management's unjust refusal to regularize their positions.
Point of law :Labour Law -Admittedly, the workmen in all these four petitions are civilian. They are not claiming regularization of their services. The grievances raised by all the workmen, who were ....
The Industrial Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain complaints of unfair labor practices unless an undisputed employer-employee relationship is established.
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
