IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.N. PATHAK, J.
The Management of M/s. Motors Limited – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W.P. (L) No. 4867 of 2012
Decided On : 18-06-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 2(s) - Workmen - Entitled to get pay and other benefits - Business of manufacturing and sale of automobiles - Prayer has been made for setting aside Award passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court in Ref. Case whereby the learned Court has held that respondent No. 2 being employee of Petitioner Company, is entitled to get salary and other benefits at par with other employees of Petitioner Company.
Finding of the Court:
Impugned Award suffers from patent illegalities and therefore, it can comfortably be said that the same is based upon errors of law. Admittedly there is no relationship of employer-employee between petitioner-Management and concerned workman. Neither in appointment of workmen nor in the process of their engagement, the petitioner-Management has played any role and industrial disputes against petitioner- Management is wholly illegal and uncalled for - Tribunal completely overlooked material evidence and evidences which cannot be termed to be cogent ground for treating these workmen to be employees of petitioner-Management - Award passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court quashed and set aside.
Result: Writ Petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
S.N. PATHAK, J.
1. In view of outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, case has been taken up through Video Conferencing and heard at length. Concerned lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding which has been held through Video Conferencing and there is no complaint in respect to audio and video clarity and quality and after hearing at length, the matter is being disposed of finally.
PRAYER
2. In the instant writ application prayer has been made for setting aside the Award dated 22.02.2012, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jamshedpur in Ref. Case No. 03 of 1998, whereby the learned Court has held that the respondent No. 2 being the employee of the Petitioner Company, is entitled to get salary and other benefits at par with the other employees of the Petitioner Company.
FACTUAL MATRIX
3. The brief facts of the case as stated in the writ petition is that petitioner is a Company which is involved in the business of manufacturing and sale of automobiles at Jamshedpur (Jharkhand) and other places in the Country. The workmen employed in the petitioner-company have their exclusive registered and recognized Trade Union known as “TELCO Workers’ Union” which represents the workmen of the petitioner-company. In the year 1958, the petitioner-Telco Ltd. started a separate department under the name and style of “Telco Recreation Club” for carrying activities of welfare and recreation of its employees. The said Telco Recreation Club is a Society registered under Societies Act having a separate legal entity of its own with its own source of income, its own constitution and bye-laws and has no direct connection with the petitioner-company and the petitioner under its corporate responsibility, provides financial assistance to several Societies in the area including said Club. Petitioner-company has no control over TELCO Recreation Club, which is run and managed by a Managing Committee elected/ selected by its members.
4. It is further case of the petitioner-Company that one Indra Deo Prasad on behalf of 21 persons employed in Telco Recreation Club made a claim of parity in pay and other benefits at par with the regular employees of Telco Ltd. The said disputes, upon failure of conciliation, vide Notification dated 28.04.1998, was referred by the State Govt. to the Labour Court, Jamshedpur on the following terms:
5. It is the further case of the petitioner that initially when the dispute was referred to the Labour Court, petitioner was not party to the said dispute, however, later on, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the respondent-State modified the earlier notification dated 28.04.1998 vide notification dated 17.09.1998 substituting petitioner-Company in place of Telco Recreation Club and subsequently, Labour Court also substituted the petitioner-Company as the employer of the said workmen of Telco Recreation Club, that too without any notice or without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
6. Upon being noticed, petitioner-company appeared and filed a detailed written statement stating therein that the Telco Recreation Club has no connection with Telco Ltd. and the employees of Telco Recreation Club have been employed by the Managing Committee of the Club on specific terms and conditions. It was further stated that neither in the appointment of said workmen nor in the process of their engagement Telco Ltd. had any role and therefore, the industrial disputes against the petitioner-Company is wholly illegal and uncalled for. There do not exists any employer-employee relationship between petitioner-company and the workmen of Telco Recreation Club. Workmen of the Club are exclusively workmen of the Club and have nothing to do with the petitioner-Management. It was further
Arunima Baruah vs. Union of India and Others
Air Vice Marshal J.S. Kumar vs. Governing Council of Air Force Sports Complex and Another
Balwant Rai Saluja vs. Air India and Others
Bhuwanesh Kumar Dwivedi vs. Hindalco Industries
Dr. Rajbir Singh Dalal vs. Chaudhari Devi Lal University, Sirsa and Another
General Manager (OSD), Bengal Nagpur Cotton Mills vs. Bharat Lal and Another
Harjinder Singh vs. Punjab State Warehousing Corporation
Hindalco Industries vs. Association of Engineering Workers
Indian Petrochemicals Corporation vs. Shramik Sena
National Aluminium Co. Ltd. vs. Ananta Kishore Rout
National Engineering Industries Limited vs. State of Rajasthan
National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences vs. C. Parameshwara
Pondicherry Khadi and Village Industries Board vs. P. Kulothangan
Padma Sundara Rao (Dead) and Others vs. State of T.N. and Others
Raja Bahadur Giriwar Prasad Narain Singh v. Dukhu Lal Das and Others
Sarva Shramik Sangh vs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and Others
State of Bihar vs. M/s. Bata Shoe Co. Ltd. and Others
Syed Yakoob vs. K.S. Radhakrishnan
Sawarn Singh vs. State of Punjab
S.J.S. Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. vs. State of Bihar and Others
Sri L.A. Sri Subramana Desika Gnana Sambanda Pandarasannadhi vs. State of Madras and Another
Tekraj Vasandi alias K.L. Basandhi vs. Union of India and Others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.