T.K. Basu, J. - (1.) The Petitioner James Finlay & Company carries on business, inter alia, as Steamer Agents. It is the case of the Petitioner that prior to 1956 the Petitioner used to employ tally clerks who were a body of floating persons free to accept employment under different employers from time to time. The Respondents Nos. 2 to 28 are such tally clerks who were employed by the Petitioner from time to time as required by them. It is the Petitioner's case that, while employed, these clerks used to get wages on a daily rate basis on the total number of days on completion of a ship's discharging or loading as the case may be. They were not entitled to any other benefits or payments. The said tally clerks were also, as I have said before, free to accept employment under other employers.
(2.) After the coming into force of the Calcutta Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme), which was framed under the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 tally clerks were included in the Scheme as a category of workers. Under the provisions of the Scheme of 1956 a Reserve Pool Register had to be maintained of workmen belonging to different categories. Only those workers who were registered as members of this pool under the Scheme could be employed by a registered employer under the provisions of the Scheme.
(3.) It is not disputed that the Petitioner Company is not a registered employer under the Scheme of 1956. As such, it was not permitted to employ any tally clerk who are now part of the reserve pool in terms of the Scheme. These clerks have now to be employed by the Petitioner as and when required through the Stevedores who are registered employers under the Scheme.;