SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Guj) 757

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :AKSHAY H.MEHTA
GUJARAT MAZDOOR SABHA - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
S.C.A. 5192 of 1999
Decided On : 10/08/2002

Advocates Appeared: ASIM J.PANDYA, DARSHANA PANDIT, K.M.PATEL, K.S.Nanavati, MUKUL SINHA

Headnote:

Multi-Unit Cooperative societies Act – ACCORDING to petitioner, inspite of the abolition of contract labour system in the operations of stacking and; loading and unloading of urea bags, iffco availed the service of contractor to carry on these operations by contriving a device to approach the Central government and obtain its permission for that purpose. It is further averred that IFFCO also obtained registration certificate under the Act from the said authority and managed to get the notifications issued by the Labour Commissioner, State of Gujarat declaring that for certain industries in Gujarat the appropriate Government was the Central Government for the purpose of various labour legislations including the Act. It is in these circumstances, the licences granted by respondent no. 3 i. e. the Registration and Licencing Authority (Central) under the Act at Ahmedabad are challenged. The challenge is based on the ground that the Central Government is not the appropriate Government vis-à-vis IFFCO and it has no authority to do so. 2. 5. AS against that, the IFFCO has put forward its case stating that vis-à-vis IFFCO power of the State Government to act as appropriate Government in relation to the provisions of the Act has come to an end – Held, that there are reasons for prosecuting such officer, he may proceed to do so. Such officer, whether can be prosecuted in the present case is matter of investigation which cannot be dealt with in this petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India. However, with regard to the relief claimed in Clause (D) it can be said that looking to the controversy involved and the conflicting versions based on facts advanced by the petitioner as well as the respondents, it appears that the dispute can be best resolved by the adjudicator who can give full opportunity to all concerned to lead oral as well as documentary evidence before it and after due scrutiny thereof, a correct decision can be arrived at. Such exercise cannot be carried out by me under Article 226 of the constitution of India. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this petition stands partly allowed. Rule made absolute to aforesaid extent with no order as to costs. After the judgment is pronounced Mr. M. B. Buch learned advocate appearing for IFFCO has made a request that the direction given by this Court in this Judgment may be suspended for a period of two weeks to enable them to make alternative arrangement. The learned advocate for the petitioner has objected to grant of such time.

AKSHAY H. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) IN this petition several controversies are involved, but the main controversy is which is the appropriate Government under Section 2 (1) (a) of the contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in relation to respondent no. 2 i. e. Indian Farmers Fertilizers cooperative Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as iffco ). Rest of the controversies are incidental. To resolve these controversies certain relevant facts are required to be stated. They are as under :-

( 2 ) IFFCO is a cooperative society. It was initially formed under the Multi-Unit Cooperative societies Act and after repeal of the said Act under the provisions of the Multi State Cooperative Societies Act. Its area of operation extends to the whole of the Indian union. The main objects for which IFFCO has been formed and registered as a multi - unit cooperative society are as under :-"the object of IFFCO shall be to promote the economic interest of its members by undertaking manufacture of chemical, fertilizers and allied products/bye products and their conversion, storage, transportation and marketing, undertake manufacture/processing of pesticides, seeds, agricultural machinery and implements and other agricultural inputs and their storage, transportation and marketing and undertake such other activities which are conducive and incidental thereto. (B) In furtherance of above objects IFFCO may undertake one or more of the following activities :- (i) to set up plant or plants for manufacture of chemical, fertilizers and allied products/bye products, (ii) to undertake production, processing and manufacture of insecticides, pesticides, deeds, agricultural machinery and implements and other agricultural production, requisites by setting up or taking on lease manufacturing unit either directly or in collaboration with or in the cooperative institution/public sector enterprises or any other agency. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx (ix) to promote and organise other cooperative societies in the field of manufacturing, production and marketing of fertilizers and other agricultural production, requisites and agricultural and rural development. "iffco is having its units and production plants at different places such as Phulpur in U. P. , kandla in District Kachchha and Kalol in District Mehsana in Gujarat. 2. 1. THE petitioner is a registered trade union and according to it, it is having majority of the workmen engaged by the IFFCO for the operation of loading and unloading of urea filled bags to be packed, despatched in railway wagons and trucks. 2. 2. IFFCO engages contract labour for the purpose of stacking the urea bags on the platform and loading and unloading them in and from railway wagons and the trucks. According to the petitioner, in the year 1984 the IFFCO Karmachari Sangh moved the State government as the appropriate Government under section 10 of the Act for abolition of the contract labour system in the operation of stacking and loading/unloading of urea bags and also for certain other operations in IFFCO. The said case of the IFFCO Karmachari Sangh came to be referred as Reference No. 3/1984 before the State advisory Board constituted u/s. 10 of the Act. As per the information of the petitioner, in the year 1986 the said Advisory Board recommended to the State Government abolition of contract labour system in the operations of stacking and loading and unloading of urea bags. However, the State Government did not act on the recommendation of the Advisory Board for considerable time. With the result the system of engaging contract labour in those operations continued. Some time in the year 1995 the concerned workmen became members of the petitioner and the petitioner thereafter took adequate interest in the direction of getting the system of contract labour abolished in these operations. It, therefore, gave notice to the Secretary of the Labour and employment Department of the State Government dated 1 4/08/1995 wit



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top