Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.20 seconds)Awadhesh K. Singh And Others vs Union Of India & Ors on 17 April, 2012
"As far as the judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High
Court in the case of Awadhesh Singh vs. Union of
India and Ors is concerned, the ratio deci dendi in
the same is that in the case of contractual worker
either and Central Administrative Tribunal or the
Industrial Tribunal have the jurisdiction and when
the alternate mechanism is provided in the law,
the petitioner could not have invoked the extra
ordinary jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. When the Hon'ble High Court refused to
entertain the Writ Petition, it was no where held
that the employees of the contractor can
approach the Central Administrative Tribunal but
it was viewed that in the matter of contractual
employee either the Central Administrative
Tribunal or the Industrial Tribunal had the
jurisdiction. In fact, where the department
directly engaged somebody on contract basis and
not through the contractor, the grievance of
contract employee is amenable to the jurisdiction
of the Tribunal and in such cases where the work
is assigned to the contractor and it is the
employee of the contractor who has a grievance,
the grievance can be looked into by the Labour
Court or Industrial Tribunal under the Central
Govt. in terms of the CLRA. Besides, we are also
(OA Nos. 176 to 183 of 2019 & OA Nos. 191 to 204 of 2019)
(27)
convinced with the plea raised by the
respondents that when the applicants rightly
approached the Industrial Tribunal for abolition of
the contract and regularization of their services
for part of the relief i.e. for continuance of their
contractual service, they cannot approach the
Tribunal. Once the Industrial Tribunal adjudicates
the issue of abolition of contract and
regularization of the applicants, they could also
adjudicate the issue of their entitlement to
continue in service. Thus, we find that the
Original Application is not amenable to our
jurisdiction and is also barred by principle of res
sub-judice. "
Union Of India And Anr vs Chotelal And Ors on 8 December, 1998
19. A preliminary objection was raised in the said OA by
the respondents and its maintainability was disputed. While
relying upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
(OA Nos. 176 to 183 of 2019 & OA Nos. 191 to 204 of 2019)
(26)
the matter of Chotelal (supra), this Tribunal arrived at a
conclusion that where the department directly engages
somebody on contract basis and not through the contractor,
the grievance of the contract employee is amenable to the
jurisdiction of this Tribunal and in such cases where the
work is assigned to the contractor and it is the employee of
the contractor who has a grievance, the grievance can be
looked into by the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal
under the Central Government in terms of the Contract
Labour Regulation Act. The operative portion of the said
judgment is reproduced here as under:
Mamta & Ors vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 6 February, 2020
18. Exactly an identical issue, which is involved in the
present case, had cropped up before the Principal Bench of
this Tribunal in the matter of Mamta & Others (supra)
wherein the applicants were engaged for housekeeping
services by different contractors and their services were
utilized in Acharyashree Bhikshu Govt. Hospital, Moti Nagar,
New Delhi and they had prayed for issuance of directions to
respondents to not to dispense with their services till the
Committee constituted under the Chairmanship of Chief
Secretary redresses their grievance.
The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970
1