Mumbai Shramik Sangh vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. And ... on 30 January, 1997
The Supreme Court held, therefore, in the absence of any effective or direct control in the Bank to supervise and control the work done by various persons, the workers in the canteen run by the Implementation Committee (Canteen Committee) cannot come within the ratio of M.M.R. Khan case (supra). As regards the canteens run by the cooperative societies, the mere fact that the Bank nominates its representative to the Committee or reimburses the licence renewal charges, will not in any way provide any direct control. In respect of the contract, the Bank has detailed the subsidy and other facilities afforded by it to run the canteen and has also stipulated certain conditions necessary for conducting the canteen in a good, hygienic and efficient manner like insistence of the quality of food, supply of food, engagement of experienced persons etc. However, the Apex Court held that such conduct cannot in any manner point out any obligation in the Bank to provide a canteen. The Apex Court held, therefore, on the facts of the case before it that in the absence of any statutory or other legal obligation and in the absence of any right in the Bank to supervise and control the work or the details thereof in any manner regarding the canteen workers employed in the three types of canteens, it cannot be said that the relationship of master and servant existed between the Bank and the various persons employed in three types of canteens.