- (1.) The second respondent upon being terminated on 22 June 2012 approached the Ministry of Labour Court under Section 22-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, thereafter, in terms of Section 10 contained in Chapter III of the Act, a reference was made by the Ministry of Labour Court on 6 February 2013 referring the dispute to the first respondent, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur. The following reference was made:- "Whether the demand of Km. Lalita d/o Late Dashrat Prasad claiming her appointment with effect from 24 March 2009 and her termination with effect from 19 June 2012 by the management of GAIL (India) Ltd., Pata, is legal and justified? What relief the workman is entitled to?
(2.) The second respondent submitted a statement of claim before the first respondent in Industrial Dispute Case No. 16 of 2013. The petitioner a Government of India undertaking contested by filing written statement, inter alia, raising a preliminary objection that the claim is wrong, the second respondent is not an employee of the petitioner, rather an employee of M/s. Pitambra Construction, Dibiyapur a contractor appointed by the petitioner-Management under the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. (Labour Contract Act, 1970) During the pendency of the proceedings before the first respondent, the petitioner filed an application (16/1-3) with a prayer to implead the following contractors to the claim petition. "1. M/s Global S.S. Construction Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai; ii. M/s Uttrakhand Purva Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd., Dehradun; iii. M/s. Pitambra Construction, Dibiyapur."
(3.) The workman/second respondent filed her objections. The first respondent vide order dated 16 July 2015 rejected the application to implead the labour contractors.;