retrenched 32 workers on July 11, 2001. It has been further alleged that workers at Annexure A are workers of respondent No. 4-company ... Section 10 prohibiting employment of contract labour, but it does not create any lien in favour of the contract workers. It only provides that
retrenched 32 workers on 11.7.2001. It has been further alleged that workers at Annexure-A are workers of respondent No. 4 company but respondent ... Section 10 prohibiting employment of contract labour but it does not create any lien in favour of the contract workers. It only provides that
this Court pass any interim order protecting these contract workers?
5. The first issue with regard to power to issue a direction in absence ... under Section 10(2) of the Contract Labour (Regularisation & Abolition) Act.
(6) In case the contract workers claim that a particular contract
Contract Workers Of Karnataka ... vs State Of Karnataka on 7 August, 2001
Equivalent citations: [2002(93)FLR814], 2001(6)KARLJ496
ORDER
The Court
1. These ... Contract Labour System. Consequent on this, all the workers were reverted back to Contract Labour System from
contractors. It is contended that the so-called contracts are totally sham and bogus and contract workers should be treated as permanent and direct workers ... Section 10 of the Contract Labour Act for abolition of the contract labour in respect of jobs performed by contract workers engaged through respondent
none of the workers so employed were connected with manufacturing activities. It is further observed that the workers employed as contract labour were not doing ... Railway workers into skilled and unskilled and then treating the workers engaged by the respondents in the category of unskilled workers. Undoubtedly, the Apex Court
provisions for registration of
establishments which employ contract labour. Section 10 which
prohibits the employment of contract labour falls in this chapter;
we shall revert ... made responsible for payment of wages to each worker employed
by him as contract labour before the prescribed period yet for
effective implementation of this
servant relationship between the appellant company on the one hand and the contract labour on the other. The appellant company denied all other charges ... question as to whether any particular contract was sham and bogus and whether the contract workers were in fact the direct workmen of the principal
contract labour in industrial
undertakings depending on the facts arising in each case.
Then came on the scene the fate of contract workers ... relation to prohibition of contract labour and regulation
of contract labour. They contended that the basis on which
contract labour can be abolished under this
learned Tribunal that contract system had been a camouflage and a smoke and screen to avoid regularisation of workers and paying them appropriate wages ... Indian Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. v. United Contract Workers' Union, 100 CWN 171, Dhananjay Jana and others v. Union of
India
