Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9. State of Karnataka has filed its written statement. Along with the written statement respondent State has attached a copy of the statement of objections in similar connected writ petition in W.P. No. 12903 of 1997, dated 13th October, 1997. In addition to the objections filed in the written statement in this writ petition Government has taken the leave of the Court to adopt the statement of objections already filed in the said connected writ petitions. The statement of objections filed in the earlier writ petition has been attached as Annexure-Rl. Averments made in the petition have been denied. By referring to the statement of objections and reasons that accompanied the Bill for abolition of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 it was stated that the Act was made keeping in view two objectives namely, abolition of contract labour, where it is possible and regulation of contract labour where such abolition is not possible in view of the fact that certain works by their very nature required to be executed through contractors. Such works could be classified as works of a temporary nature such as construction of roads, buildings, works undertaken on a turn-key basis for which employment of a permanent work force would neither be feasible nor practicable. The Act does not countenance the employment of contract labour when the work involved is incidental or necessary to the main operations and perennial in nature. Wherever the work is incidental or necessary to the main operations and perennial in nature, then the appropriate Government has the authority to abolish employment of contract labour as contemplated under Section 10 of the Act. The State Government vested with powers under Section 10 of the Act could abolish employment of contract labour after consulting the State Advisory Board constituted under Section 4 of the Act. This Advisory Board is a body, which consists of representatives of Employers, Employees, Contractors, Contract Workers and Government representatives. The question of contract labour in canteens in factories which employ 250 workers and more was a matter referred to Karnataka State Labour Advisory Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). The Board deliberated on this question over a period of time in a series of meetings. Thereafter the Board came to the conclusion that employing contract labour in canteens in factories employing 250 workmen or more, fits squarely with the objective of the Act, namely, abolition and consequently, made recommendation to the respondent. The respondent after carefully considering recommendation of the Board and after taking into consideration the various factors including those mentioned under Section 10(2) of the Act, issued the impugned notification. The record of proceedings from 1988 onwards till the issuance of notification was placed before the Court for its perusal.

20. On 10th June, 1988 on the suggestion made by Sri V.G.K. Nair and Sri H. Mahadevan the members of the Board that the principal employers of various factories were not maintaining the canteen as per the Karnataka Factories Rules and engaging the contractors in various industrial canteens and thus depriving the contract workers of the benefits provided under Rule 25(v)(a) of the Karnataka Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). They were supported by other members. On this the Chairman of the Board suggested to constitute a Committee to study the feasibility of abolition of contract system in hotels (canteen) and to submit a detailed report to the Board. Committee submitted its report on 29th May, 1989.

21. Apart from the officials due representation was given to the employers, employees and the contractors on the Committee. Committee finalised comprehensive questionnaire to issue to certain employers, establishments and contractors who were interested in the subject for replies. After receipt of the replies to the questionnaire the Committee visited some of the industrial canteens in Bangalore for detailed investigation and to study the existing problems in them. In the meantime some of the employers, contractors and trade unions requested the Com-mittee for extension of time for submitting replies to the questionnaire. A press note was issued in the local papers regarding the (sic) the Committee and inviting suggestions and objections and also to meet the Committee in person on 25th October, 1988. Fair number of employers filed replies to the questionnaire sent to them. Committee had discussion with management, contractors, workers and also with the staff members of the canteen. After analysing the facts which the Committee had gathered from the representatives of the employers, employees and the contractors and discussions which they had, it was unanimously recommended by the Committee to abolish the contract system in industrial canteens. A detailed reference was made to the factors mentioned in clauses (a) to (d) of Section 10(2). The Committee concluded that the operation of the industrial canteen is connected with the very functioning of the industry where an industry is required to run a canteen statutorily having 250 or more workers. No operation or process could be carried on without workmen and there could be no employment of workmen without canteen being provided. Keeping these factors in mind the Committee concluded that there is no justification in running industrial canteens on contract system or to engage contract labour in canteens run by the factories themselves. Accordingly Committee submitted its report. The Committee Report was taken up in the 7th meeting of the Advisory Meeting held on 29th April, 1994. View point of the representatives of employers and the employees was taken note of. One of the objections raised by the representatives of M/s. Larsen and Toubro Limited was that report of the Committee should not be taken as the same is five years old and in this five years lot of changes have taken place which were relevant to the present circumstances. Chairman of the Board expressed the view that the life of Karnataka Advisory Board Committee was coming to an end and consequently a new Advisory Board has to be constituted. It was suggested that in this view of the matter it would be appropriate if the matter is left to the new Advisory Board to be constituted which would consider the issue involved. This suggestion of the Chairman was accepted unanimously. New Board was constituted and the meeting of the newly constituted Advisory Board was held on 18th December, 1995. Representatives of the employers and the employees put forward their point of view. After hearing the views of the members, the Chairman expressed the view that it would be appropriate and in the interest of all concerned, if the report is discussed at the district level by the representatives of concerned parties and their views obtained. The suggestion was accepted and it was unanimously resolved that Labour Officers at district level would call meetings of the representatives of the employers and the employees, discuss the recommendation of the Committee, obtain their views and furnish the same to the Board. On receipt of the report from the Labour Officers, the Board could take appropriate decision. 9th Meeting of the Board was held on 3rd of February, 1996. The meeting was adjourned without taking any substantive decision because the Secretary of the Board informed that reports from the district levels had not been received. Chairman advised the Labour Officers to submit their report expeditiously. After receipt of the report from the districts the 10th Board Meeting was held on 1st March, 1996. After taking note of the view points of the employers, employees and the contractors it was decided that in industrial canteens in factories employing 250 or more workers, located in Bangalore, Mysore, Hubli, Dharwad, Belgaum and Mangalore, detailed information should be obtained about the understanding between the principal employer and the contractors and brought to the notice of the Board. Government being a model employer, contract labour should be abolished in Public Sector Undertakings as well, 11th Board Meeting took place on 10th December, 1996. After taking into consideration the report of the sub-committee supplemented by the reports of the Labour Officers from the districts and the reports received from six important towns where most of the establishments having 250 or more workers were located, the Board came to the conclusion that the contract labour be abolished from establishments which are mandatorily required to run a canteen under Section 46 of the Factories Act, 1948, having 250 workers or more employees. As it was a statutory requirement, running of a canteen was a necessity. The canteen work being of perennial in nature required permanent workers. It recommended the Government to abolish employment of contract labour in industrial establishments in factories employing 250 or more workers. The matter was then put up before the Secretary to Government. It was discussed at various levels of the Government and ultimately a final decision was taken by the Government to abolish the contract labour in canteens in establishments employing 250 or more workers. Contention of the Counsel for the petitioner that there was no application of mind or that the decision was taken on the basis of an outdated report submitted in the year 1989 cannot be accepted. Keeping in view the period which had elapsed since the submission of report the Board reappraised itself of all later developments after taking into consideration the fresh data which was made available to it by the Labour Officers from each district after discussion with the employer and the employees and the reports received from the six important cities where most of the establishments employing 250 or more workers were located and after taking into account the view points of the employers and employees, the Board made its final recommendation recommending abolition of contract labour.

1. Unloading of billets/ingots and cutting.
2. Placing billets/ingots on the pusher.
3. Moving billets/ingots on the pusher into the furnace.
4. Activities connected with the operation of the furnance.
5. Pulling and pushing of heated billets/ingots into rolling mill/roughing mill.
6. Cutting the steel to required length on cooling bed.
7. Twisting of finished goods.
8. Cutting.
9. Bending.
10. Bundling.
11. Loading.

the contract labour was engaged. All these operations/processes are permanent and perennial in nature. The process/operations were directly connected with the main process/nature of the industry. Government agreeing with the State Advisory Board formed the opinion that employment of contract labour in these process/operation would be against the principles of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. Advocate-General placed before us the proceedings of the various Board Meetings and the Government file, After examining the record we are of the opinion that there was due deliberations in the meetings of the Board and the recommendation was made by the Board keeping in view the view points of the employers and the employees. It can be seen from the nature of work that the process or occupation are incidental as well as perennial in nature which can only be discharged by having required employees. From the record we find that the Commissioner of Labour, Sri T.Y. Nayaz Ahmed, I.A.S., himself accompanied by officers/officials of his department visited steel re-rolling mills and observed employees of various jobs/occupation. The wages paid to the workmen were low, they did not have any life saving facilities and were deprived of various benefits that accrued to them under different labour laws. It was further found by the Commissioner that although the work was perennial in nature, contract labour was employed. While the lowest pay the permanent worker gets was Rs. 2,400/- per month, the skilled contract worker gets Rs. 800/- to 900/- per month. The contractors in a very systematic manner pay only 60 per cent of what they receive from the Principal Employer to the contract labour and retain the balance 40 per cent with themselves. The abolition of contract labour in steel re-rolling mills was being considered simultaneously with the abolition of contract work in canteens in establishment employing 250 or more was being considered. The process was going parallel. The contract labour engaged is in operation being processes which are permanent and perennial in nature and these works are directly connected with the main operation of the establishment. The permitting of employment on contract labour in these processes in steel re-rolling mills would be contrary to the provisions of the Act and the various judgments of the Supreme Court of India referred to above.