Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in the instant petition is to the award dated 3.9.2009 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court -III, Faridabad whereby a reference has been answered against the petitioner -workman and he has been held not entitled to any relief. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently argue that the finding recorded by the Labour Court as regards there being no relationship of employer and employee between the workman and respondent No. 2 and further holding the workman to be an employee of the Contractor i.e. M/s. Progressive Security Services, is perverse. In this regard, learned counsel would contend that the Contractor had produced fake and forged record before the Labour Court and which could not have been relied upon. It has also been contended that there has been a violation of the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (for short '1970 Act'), inasmuch, as for the period the workman had worked as a Driver i.e. from 1.9.1997 till 28.2.2000, neither respondent No. 2 -Management had any certificate/registration under Section 7 of the 1970 Act and nor did the Contractor -firm i.e. M/s. Progressive Security Services, Ballabgarh have any licence under Section 12 of the Act. Learned counsel argues that as a necessary corollary, the workman would be deemed to be a direct employee of respondent No. 2 -Management.
(2.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and having perused the case paper book, this Court is of the considered view that no basis or interference in the impugned award is made out. The claim set up by the workman was that he had been appointed by the respondent -Management as a Driver on 1.9.1997 and his services were illegally terminated on 28.2.2000 and in violation of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. Respondent -Management had opposed the claim by taking a preliminary objection that there was no relationship of employer/employee between the parties and the workman had, in fact, been employed by the Contractor, namely, M/s. Progressive Security Services, Ballabgarh.
(3.) UPON reference having been made, the following issues were framed by the Labour Court on 27.5.2003: 1. Whether there is employer employee relationship between the parties? OPWM 2. Whether the claimant completed 240 days service under the respondent during 12 calender months preceding the date of termination of his service? OPWM 3. Whether the termination of the service of the claimant was illegal due to non -compliance with section 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? OPWM 4. As per reference? OPWM;