D.S.Mathur, J. - (1.) This judgment governs Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petitions Nos. 56 and 57 of 1960, both by Singh Engineering Works (P), Ltd. Kanpur (to be referred hereinafter as the petitioner company) to challenge the awards of the presiding officer, industrial tribunal (I), Allahabad, respondent 1, on two references made to it by the Government of the State of Uttar Pradesh, respondent 2 (to be referred hereinafter as the State Government), As the questions of law involved therein are the same, both the petitions are being disposed of by one judgment. The request made in both the petitions is that a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued to quash the a wards, dated 26 September 1959, and also a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the State Government to withdraw the reference orders contained in Notification Nos. 254(LC)/XVIII-LA-868(KR)-1958, dated 4 May 1959 and 242(LC)/XVIII-LA-1237 (IKR)-1958, dated 8 May 1959 as subsequently amended by Notification No. 393(LC)/XVIII-LA-1237 (IKR)-1958, dated 5 June 1959; and also notifications, dated 8 October1959, under which the two awards of the industrial tribunal were published.
(2.) The notifications and the awards are, in substance, challenged on the ground that the contractors and their employees were not workmen and employees of the petitioner company and consequently the State Government could not refer any dispute between the contractors and their employees on one side and the petitioner company on the other to the industrial tribunal and the awards made by the tribunal were without Jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.
(3.) The petitioner company has its registered office at Kanpur and carries on the business of manufacture and sale of railway tracks and steel bars. The company gave contracts for certain items of work to seven persons. The industrial dispute with regard to six contractors and their employees was referred to the tribunal under the first reference order, which is in issue in Writ No. 56 of 1960. The case of the seventh contractor and his employees is in issue in Writ No. 57 of 1960. The petitioner company regards all the contractors as independent contractors, while the latter claim to be supervisors in the employment of the petitioner company. The other 108 persons involved in Writ No. 56 of 1960 are those who were employed directly by the six contractors. The number of such employees involved in Writ No. 57 of 1960 is ten. The case of the petitioner company is that all these workers were employed by and were in the employment of the contractors, and not of the company; while the workers claim to be workmen under the employment of the petitioner company entitled to bonus and other privileges enjoyed by other workmen of the company.;