D.N.PATEL, J. - (1.) THE present petition has been preferred under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against an award, passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. I, Dhanbad, in Reference No. 8 of 1995 dated August 16, 2002 (Annexure 3 to the memo of present petition), whereby, it has been held by the Industrial Tribunal that the services of the members of respondent No. 2 Union are to be regularized.
(2.) THE members of respondent No. 2 Union were engaged in repairing work of the iron tubs in a coal mining of the petitioner (public sector undertaking) where the main activity was never repairing of tubs but excavating the coal. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, who has vehemently submitted that the Industrial Tribunal has lost sight of the fact that the petitioner, which is a public sector undertaking, is engaged in coal mining and its main activity is to excavate the coal and incidentally if the tubs, which are carrying raw coals from mines to surface of the earth, met with an accident, these iron tubs require repairing and, therefore, a contractor, namely, Deo Narayan Mistri, was engaged and as and when such accident arises and there are damages to the iron tubs, which are carrying coal from mines to the surface, they were given for repairing but never repair was the main activity of the petitioner undertaking and, thus, the Industrial Tribunal has under misconception of fact and law as if the repair was the main activity of the petitioner undertaking, passed the order for regularization. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is an error apparent on the face of the record and, therefore, the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) IT has also been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal is also dehors the evidence. The evidence collected during the reference shows that the members of respondent No. 2 union were engaged only for repairing of the iron tubs, as and when accident arises and damages caused to the tubs. Nobody knows when the accident will arise. Nobody knows when the tubs would get damaged. Accident is not a regular phenomena nor a damage to a tub is a regular phenomena. For this accidental work if the contractor is engaged and if the contractor has engaged other employees, they can never be treated as employees/workmen of the petitioner. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the Industrial Tribunal and hence also the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal deserves to be quashed and set aside.;