R. V. Raveendran, J. - (1.) The appellant union represents the canteen workers of the contractor engaged by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. ('IOC' for short) for running its canteen at its Western Region Marketing Division at Mumbai. The appellant union filed W.P.No. 1267/1999 in the Bombay High Court on behalf of the said workers seeking the following reliefs : (i) a direction to the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board and Union of India to hold an investigation under section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 ('CLRA Act' for short), on its application dated 29.12.1998 and make an order abolishing the contract labour system in regard to workmen in the canteen of Marketing division of IOC; and (b) a direction to IOC to absorb/regularize the services of the said workers. The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 11.11.2003.
(2.) Thereafter the appellant again approached the High Court in W.P.No.853/2004 contending that the contracts between IOC and the canteen contractor was sham and bogus and seeking a direction to the Union of India to make a reference of the dispute raised by them in regard to the demand for permanency of the canteen workers to the Industrial Tribunal. The High Court vide order dated 22.4.2004 disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the Central Government to consider and dispose of the request for reference with a further direction to maintain status quo in regard to concerned workmen till disposal of the reference application. In pursuance of it conciliation proceedings were held and the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central)-III, Mumbai, sent a Failure of Conciliation Report dated 2.9.2004. Government of India by order dated 21.12.2004 refused to make a reference of the dispute under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('ID Act' for short). The Labour Ministry of the Government of India was of the view that the dispute, prima facie, was not fit for adjudication, as "the workmen in respect of whom the dispute was raised were not appointed by the management of IOC but were engaged by the contractor holding a valid and legal contract."
(3.) The said order was challenged by the appellant in W.P. No. 1673/2005 seeking a mandamus to the Government of India to refer the dispute raised, to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The appellant contended that the Central Government had usurped the power and function of the Industrial Tribunal, by deciding the very issue that required to be referred to and decided by the Tribunal. The said writ petition was dismissed by the High Court by the impugned order dated 19.8.2006 on the following two grounds : (i) The appellant had earlier filed WP No. 1267/1999 for abolition of contract labour in the canteen in the establishment of IOC. The said earlier petition (W.P.No. 1267/1999) was dismissed on 11.11.2003 for non-prosecution and attained finality; and once having sought the relief of abolition of contract labour, the appellant was estopped from seeking any other relief by contending that the contract was sham and not genuine. (ii) The order dated 21.12.2004 of the appropriate government did not suffer from any infirmity or arbitrariness, when examined with reference to the principles laid down by this Court in Avon Services Production Agencies (P) Ltd. v. The Industrial Tribunal (1979) 1 SCC 1). The said order is challenged in this appeal by special leave.;