Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.19 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970
Steel Authority Of India Ltd. & Ors. ... vs National Union Water Front Workers & Ors on 30 August, 2001
4. The Award has not been brought on record. Further no
1
2026:JHHC:1336
order for regularisation can be passed by the High Court invoking
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This
proposition of law has already been set at rest by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of "Steel Authority of India and
Others vs. National Union Waterfront Workers and Others"
Air India Statutory Corporation vs United Labour Union & Ors on 6 November, 1996
(3) Neither Section 10 of the CLRA Act nor any other provision in the
Act, whether expressly or by necessary implication, provides for
automatic absorption of contract labour on issuing a notification by
the appropriate Government under sub-section (1) of Section 10,
prohibiting employment of contract labour, in any process, operation
or other work in any establishment. Consequently the principal
employer cannot be required to order absorption of the contract
labour working in the establishment concerned.
(4) We overrule the judgment of this Court in Air India case [(1997) 9
SCC 377 : 1997 SCC (L&S) 1344] prospectively and declare that any
direction issued by any industrial adjudicator/any court including the
High Court, for absorption of contract labour following the judgment
in Air India case [(1997) 9 SCC 377 : 1997 SCC (L&S) 1344] shall
hold good and that the same shall not be set aside, altered or
modified on the basis of this judgment in cases where such a
direction has been given effect to and it has become final.
(5) On issuance of prohibition notification under Section 10(1) of the
CLRA Act prohibiting employment of contract labour or otherwise, in
an industrial dispute brought before it by any contract labour in
regard to conditions of service, the industrial adjudicator will have to
consider the question whether the contractor has been interposed
either on the ground of having undertaken to produce any given
result for the establishment or for supply of contract labour for work
of the establishment under a genuine contract or is a mere
3
2026:JHHC:1336
ruse/camouflage to evade compliance with various beneficial
legislations so as to deprive the workers of the benefit thereunder. If
the contract is found to be not genuine but a mere camouflage, the
so-called contract labour will have to be treated as employees of the
principal employer who shall be directed to regularise the services of
the contract labour in the establishment concerned subject to the
conditions as may be specified by it for that purpose in the light of
para 6 hereunder.
Section 2 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Trade Unions Act, 1926
1