Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)
Indian Railway Thikadar Mazdoor Congress (Kharagpur Division) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition for payment of wages (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. claims for minimum wages and responsibilities (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. arguments regarding employee status and contractor obligations (Para 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. court's observations on wage non-payment (Para 24 , 25 , 36) |
| 5. ratios regarding contractor liability for wages (Para 45 , 48 , 49 , 54) |
| 6. final order and judgment (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58) |
JUDGMENT :
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
1. The writ petition has been preferred praying for quashing of the decision dated 06.03.2024 and any decision made to the effect of not paying the members of the petitioner Union who have worked for the Indian Railways during the period 01.01.2001 to 07.07.2009 at the Kharagpur Railway station and to pay wages to the 172 members of the petitioner Union at the rate which their counterparts working for the Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation are paid at the Kharagpur Railway station during the period 01.01.2001 to 07.07.2009 and to fix the rates of minimum wages for Public Motor Transport and pay wages for the period 01.01.2001 to 07.07.2009 along with interest for having worked at the Kharagpur Ra
The principal employer is liable for unpaid wages to contract labourers as per contract law and labour statutes, reinforcing protections against forced labor under constitutional provisions.
it is difficult to extend minimum time scale to the petitioners as they were not engaged by respondent Nos. 4 to 11 either on contract basis or outsourcing basis.
Point of law: Labour Law – arrears of pay – Court need not advert to the submissions made on behalf of the management as the same would tantamount to adjudication of the controversy on merits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that under Section 33(C)(2) of the ID Act, the Industrial Tribunal can adjudicate upon the entitlement of the workman to receive benefit in terms o....
A judgment contrary to the evidence or without evidence is perverse. Concession of counsel on such facts and law does not bind the party.Master-servant relationship.
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
