The Maharashtra Sugar Mills, Ltd. vs The State Of Bombay on 22 May, 1951
In The Maharashtra Sugar Millss case (supra), the question
that fell for consideration of this court was whether the contract
labour was covered by the definition of employee under the
Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 and, therefore, should be
treated as employees of the appellant-sugar mills. There
contractors were engaged by the appellant for carrying on certain
operations in its establishment. The contractors were to employ
contract labour (workers) for carrying out the work undertaken
but they should have the approval of the appellant, although it was
the obligation of the contractors to pay wages to the workers.
However, the contract labour engaged by the contractors got the
same amenities from the appellant as were available to its muster
roll workers. An industrial dispute arose in respect of the
payment of wages to the contract labour engaged by the
contractors which, along with other disputes, was referred to the
Industrial Court by the Government. The reference was
contested, as being not maintainable, by the appellant on the plea
that the contractors workers were not employees within the
meaning of the said Act. The term employee is defined in the
said Act to mean any person employed to do any skilled or
unskilled manual or clerical work for hire or reward in any
industry and includes a person employed by a contractor to do any
work for him in execution of a contract with an employer within
the meaning of sub-clause (3) of clause 14. It was on the basis
of the definitions of the terms the employer and the
employee, the contract labour engaged by the contractors was
held to be employees of the appellant. The decision in that case
cannot be read as holding that when a contractor engages contract
labour in connection with the work of the principal employer, the
relationship of master and servant is created between the principal
employer and the contract labour.