The main legal point established in the judgment is the statutory right conferred by Rule 25(2)(v)(a) of the 1971 Rules, which guarantees parity in wages and benefits to contract labours engaged with the regular employees of the establishment, provided they perform the same or similar kind of work.

JUDGMENT :

Since common questions of law and fact are involved in both writ petitions, therefore, these are being taken up and decided together by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of WPMS No. 369 of 2021 are being referred.

2. These petitions have been filed by Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Haridwar challenging the orders dated 28.10.2020 passed by the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Dehradun. By the said orders, the applications filed by private respondents under Rule 25(2)(v)(a) of Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Central Rules 1971 (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘1971 Rules’) have been disposed of by recording a finding that nature of duties and responsibilities of the private respondents are similar to those performed by regular Malis serving in Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited.

3. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited has challenged the aforesaid orders passed by Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Dehradun by invoking supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.

4. Respondents are contract labours who have been engaged to perform duties of Mali in the establishment of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL). They were engaged as such in the year 1987. Subsequently their services were terminated, against which they raised industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court, Dehradun. Vide award dated 5.7.1996, the Labour Court answered the reference in favour of the private respondents and declared their termination as unjust & illegal. After a long drawn litigation, private respondents were reengaged through contractor w.e.f. 8.1.2005.

5. In the year 2018, private respondents filed Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1464 of 2018 claiming wages and other benefits as were being given to Malis directly employed by the principal employer. A contention was raised on behalf of the petitioner in the said writ petition that since BHEL disputes the claim of Malis engaged through contractor for parity with the Malis serving in its permanent establishment, therefore, such dispute can only be decided under Rule 25(2)(v)(a) of 1971 Rules. In view of the objection raised on behalf of BHEL, the said writ petition was disposed of by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.2.2019 with direction to the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Dehradun to decide and come to a finding whether the nature and type of work performed by the workers who are in the permanent establishment of BHEL is the same as that of the contract labours (petitioners in the said writ petition).

6. Pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 22.2.2019, petitioners in WPSS No. 1464 of 2018 (respondents no. 1 to 4 in this writ petition) filed application before the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Dehradun under sub-rule (2)(v) of Rule 25 of Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Central Rules, 1971 read with Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970, contending that they are entitled to same wages and other benefits as are being paid to the regular employees of BHEL in view of condition mentioned in clause 5(d) of the registration certificate issued to BHEL under Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 and also in view of the provision contained in sub-rule (2)(v)(a) of Rule 25 of 1971 Rules. The relief clause of the application made by the private respondents is reproduced below:

“That in the light of above judgment the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to decide the following questions:-

(i) As to whether the nature and type of work performed by the workmen engaged by the opposite party no. 1 directly as “Mali” was the same as is being done by the petitioners.

(ii) As to whether Mr.RajvanshiYadav was performing his duties as “Mali” till the date of filing the Writ Petition bearing no. 1464 of 2018 (S/S) i.e. on 15.03.2018.”

7. In its reply filed before the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Dehradun, petitioner