Venkatachala, J. - (1.) In a writ petition, W.P. No. 277 of 1988, filed in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India 166 Railway Parcel Porters working on contract labour in certain Railway Stations of Indian Railway had claimed for therein issuance of directions to the Union of India and its Railway Administration for their permanent absorption by Indian Railways as Railwat Parcel Porters on a regular basis. When the claim in that writ petition was contested by the Union of India, Railway Administration and Societies of Railway Employees, this Court by its Order dated October, 4 1989 directed the Labour Commissioner. Uttar Pradesh to enquire as to whether the writ petitioners were contract labourer working in Railway Stations for several years as claimed by them and submit his report. Pursuant thereto, the Labour Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh, who held an elaborate enquiry after affording opportunity to the contesting parties in the writ petition to have their say, submitted his report dated October 17, 1990 to this Court. This Court, which examined the findings recorded in the said Report of the Labour Commissioner with reference to the arguments of learned counsel for parties, decided the writ petition by its Order dated April 15, 1991, the material portion of which read:-"In this Report, the Labour Commissioner has recorded findings that there was no evidence that the petitioners were the employees of the Society instead the petitioners were contract labourers provided by the Society under the agreement by the Northern Railway. The Labour Commissioner has held that the petitioners have been working as Parcel Porters with effect from the date they claimed to be working with the Northern Railway. A list showing the names and addresses of each of the petitioners is annexed to the finding which shows the date from which the petitioners have been working as Parcel Porters. On a perusal of the list, we find that most of the petitioners have been working since 1972 and some of them since 1980 and a few of them were employed in 1985. In this view, all the petitioners have completed more than 240 days of continued service. In view of the Labour Commissioner's finding, we allow the petition and direct the respondent. Railway Administration to treat the petitioners as regular Parcel Porters w.e.f. 15-4-1991 and to grant them the same salary which is being paid to regular Parcel Porters. There will be no order as to costs."
(2.) In the present writ petitions the prayers of the petitioners, who are working as Railway Parcel Porters in Railway Stations of Northern Railway, North Eastern Railway and Eastern Railway on contract labour is that their writ petitions also should be disposed of in terms of the order dated 15th April 1991 made by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition filed by Railway Parcel Porters who were in no way different from them.
(3.) Taking into consideration the nature of prayer in the present writ petitions, this Court made an order therein on November 30, 1992, which read thus: "We have heard learned counsel on either side and also the respondent No. 7 in person. On the facts and circumstances in this case, we are of the view that it is appropriate that the Assistant Commissioner (Labour). Central Govt, at Lucknow would conduct an enquiry into the allegations whether the petitioners who are porters have been working continuously and whether the work is a perennial source and the requirements of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Abolition and Regulation) Act. 1972 have been satisfied. The Assistant Labour Commissioner is directed to issue notice to the respondents and M/s. Purshottam and Shivapujan Yadav, the petitioners in this case, after giving reasonable opportunity to adduce evidence in proof of other respective case, consider the evidence placed by the parties and to submit a report in this behalf within six months from the date of the receipt of this order. The enquiry would be confined to the parcel porters only. List the matters after the receipt of the report." ;