- (1.) This writ application has been filed for quashing the notification No. 1/SHRAM-D-02-57/05L, E&T-1335 dated 25.7.2005 Issued by the State of Jharkhand whereby the dispute relating to regularization of the services of the contract labour and also the dispute relating to demands made by the Bihar Rajya Theka Kamgarh Union was referred to before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City for its adjudication.
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that Bharat Refractories Limited a Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act having refractories plant at Bhandaridah is engaged in manufacturing fire bricks. The Company does engage contractors for carrying out the job through contract labour whose control always lies with the contractor. In the year 1993, one of the unrecognized Union, namely, Bihar Rajya Theka Kamgarh Union through a letter dated 30.3.1993 raised certain demands and one of the demands related to regularization of the services of the concerned workmen. A copy of the said letter was also forwarded to the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Conciliation Officer, Bokaro Steel City. Thereupon with the intervention of the Conciliation Officer, a tripartite settlement arrived at on 28.2.1994 in between the contractors representative and the representative of the Union. In spite of that, the State of Bihar vide its notification dated 25.7.2005 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City. Terms of the reference are here under: Whether not to grant the 11 points demand letter dated 30.3.1993 of Bihar Rajya Theka Kamgar Union by the Management of M/s. Bharat Refractories Limited, Bhandaridih Refectories Plant, Bokaro is justified Whether not to regularize the 55 contract labourers, list enclosed, working for a long time in perennial and permanent nature of jobs under four sections of the said Management and depriving them of the status and privileges of permanent workmen is justified If not, what relief the related workmen are entitled to .
(3.) Upon receiving the term of reference, Reference Case No. 10 of 2005 was instituted. On being noticed, Management filed a written statement whereby validity of the reference was itself questioned on the ground that during the subsistence of tripartite settlement dated 28.2.1994, the reference in question becomes Incompetent and that apart, it was pleaded that the contract labours were never the workmen of the petitioner Company, rather they are the employees of a contractor and their services are under the control of the contractors and that contract labours were never employed to do perennial or any work of permanent nature and as such, when there is no relationship in between the employer (Management) and the employee, any reference to settle the dispute becomes wholly Incompetent.;