An industrial authority cannot refer a dispute regarding the merits of an employment relationship or worker grievances if the existence of said relationship is actively contested; such cases require a preliminary determination of the employer-employee status before substantive issues are addressed.

JUDGMENT :

SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.

1. The writ applications have been preferred challenging the impugned order of reference dated 29.11.2023. The appropriate authority herein being the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), issued the said order of reference on being satisfied as follows:

“NO. Kol-700020/17/2023-Dy.CLC(C): WHEREAS, the undersigned is of the opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employer in relation to the management of M/s Pearson Drums & Barrels Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. A.R. Engineers, service providers of IOCL, Haldia Refinery versus their workmen represented by Bharat Barrel and Drum Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Worker's Association (INTTUC) and its workman in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule below.

2. The order of reference has been made with the following schedule/issues:-

The Schedule

“1. Whether the Appropriate Government for the Management of M/s. Pearson Drums and Barrels Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Engineers, service providers of IOCL, Haldia Refinery is Central Government or State Government?

2. The action of the managements in denying the re-employment of 90 retrenched workmen are justified? If not, what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to?”

3. The principal contention of the petitioner herein which was recorded by this Court at the interim stage is as follows :

“8. The first question referred for adjudication is as to whether the appropriate Government for M/s. Pearson Drums & Barrels Pvt. Ltd. and A.R. Engineers the service provider to IOCL, is the Central Government or the State Government.

9. This appears to be ex facie illegal. If the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) had any doubt in that regard, he could not have made any reference to the CGIT.

10. The second limb of the reference is equally surprising. The second limb is "whether the actions of the management are justified? and if not what relief, the concerned workmen are entitled to?" Neither the ALC nor the workmen or the Trade Union have even whispered of any relationship between the employees of M/s. Bharat Barrel and Drum Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Worker's Association and M/s. Pearson Drums & Barrels Pvt. Ltd. or M/s. A.R. Engineers.

11. In those circumstances, this Court is not able to appreciate as to what material was available before the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) to make any reference as contained in the order dated November 29, 2023.”

4. The facts of the case in short is that the petitioner is a sole proprietorship concern.

5. The petitioner participated in the tender floated by Indian Oil Corporation Limited for "fabrication, manufacturing and supply of empty bitumen drums with BD Lid as per IS: 3575 of 1993 or its latest revision" and became successful as L-2 bidder. In consequence thereof, the petitioner has been awarded with the contract by Indian Oil Corporation vide "LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE" indicating the Tender No. HGNKK22015 and the Work Order No. 27849589 Dated 24.05.2022.

6. In terms of the said work order, the petitioner has already started the manufacturing process with its own employees as aforesaid. It is further stated that the relationship between Indian Oil Corporation (in short IOC) and the petitioner herein is not that of principal employer and contractor. Rather the management of IOC in connection with compliance of the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970