ROURKELA SHRAMIK SANGH Vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED
LAWS(SC)-2003-1-81
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: DELHI)
Decided on January 29,2003

ROURKELA SHRAMIK SANGH Appellant
VERSUS
STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S. B. Sinha, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Interpretation of an order passed by this Court in R. K. Panda and Others vs. Steel Authority of India and Others (1994) 5 SCC 304 is in question in this appeal which arises out of the judgment and order dated 25th May, 2000 passed by the High Court of Delhi in L. P. A. No. 335 of 1998 whereby and whereunder an appeal preferred by the appellant from the judgment and order dated 15th July, 1998 passed by a learned Single Judge of the said Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant was upheld.
(3.) The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The workers of the Rourkela Steel Plant filed a writ petition before this Court, inter alia, for a direction that they be held to be entitled to be paid the same pay as is paid to the regular employees and be treated as such on the premise that they had been employed by various contractors and were doing jobs which are perennial in nature and identical to what were being done by regular employees of the Plant. This Court having regard to the various interim orders passed from time to time did not relegate the workmen to avail the remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and, inter alia, directed:- "(i) All labourers, who had been initially engaged through contractors but have been continuously working with the respondent for the last ten years on different jobs assigned to them in spite of the replacement and change of the contractors, shall be absorbed by the respondent, as their regular employees subject to being found medically fit and if they are below 58 years of age, which is the age of superannuation under the respondent. ********** (vi) The respondent shall be at liberty to retrench workmen so absorbed, in accordance with law. This order shall not be pleaded as a bar to such retrenchment. (vii) If there is any dispute in respect of the identification of the contract labourers to be absorbed as directed above, such dispute shall be decided by the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), on material produced before him by the parties concerned. (viii) This direction shall be operative only in respect of 142 jobs out of 246 jobs, in view of the fact that contract labour has already been abolished in 104 jobs." ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.