ivil Appeal No 1430 of 1990
From the Judgment and Order dated 21101989 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal New Delhi in ID No 40 of 1986
NB Shetye and AM Khanwilkar for the Appellant
Ashok H Desai RP Bhatt
PH Parekh and Mrs Sumita Sharma for the Respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PUNCHHI J
This appeal by special leave is directed against the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal New Delhi in ID No 40 of 1986 published in the Gazette of India New Delhi dated 2110 89
The appellant is the Mathura Refinery Mazdoor Sangh here after referred to as Union 
The contesting respondent is the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd Mathura Refinery Project Mathura UP hereafter referred to as the Refinery 
The Union represents about 900 casual labourers working in the Refinery
These labourers are contract labourers coming under the Contract Labour Regulation  Abolition Act 1971
The nature of their work has grouped them Some of the labourers have formed themselves into cooperative societies and those societies have entered into labour contracts with 470 the Refinery
Other labourers are working under labour contractors who have contracts with the Refinery
Theirs is not a constant relationship with one contractor and these labourers keep shifting from one contractor to another
However it is claimed that these casual labourers have been working in the Refinery for so many years in the past ranging between ten to fifteen years but they are denied wages and other benefits as also other beneficial service conditions enjoyed by workmen who are regular employees of the Refinery
Claiming that they had a right to be treated at par with regular employees the Union filed Writ Petition No 2876 of 1985 under Article 32 of the Constitution of India in this Court which was disposed of on January 16 1986 by directing the Central Government to refer to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication the following questions 1
Whether in law the petitioners and the 48 workmen whose services have been terminated are employees of the Indian Oil Corporation Mathura Refinery Project Mathura 2
Whether the termination of the services of 48 workmen was justified and 3
To what relief are the workmen entitled Status quo was ordered to be maintained and the services of the workmen were ordered not to be terminated
At that time the services of 48 workmen alone were involved but as is evident the adjudication of the Tribunal would have affected others too
Pursuant to the order of this Court the Central Government referred and the Industrial Tribunal decided the above referred questions holding that the workmen were not employees of the Refinery and were rather the employees of the contractors
With regard to the termination of the services of the workmen and to what relief they were entitled the Tribunal after answering the questions against the Union and in favour of the Refinery suggested the following steps in the interest of Industrial harmony i Though the Union should have pressed their demand for abolition of the contract labour system in the Refinery to the Central Advisory Board constituted under the Act and even though it had been pursuing its remedies before this Court and the Tribunal suggestions were made to the Refinery to approach 471 the Advisory Board to make a study with regard to the desirability of continuance of the contract labour system in the Refinery
ii Till the Central Advisory Board makes its recommendations and the action is taken the management of the Refinery to ensure that the contract labour is paid at least the minimum of the pay scale of its regular employees performing the same or similar duties as the workmen of the contract labour and further that the workmen among the contract labour who have put in 5 years or more of work at the Mathura Refinery shall be continued to be employed in the same work even if there is a change in the contractor and such workmen shall not be terminated except as a punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action for misconduct etc voluntary retirement or retirement on reaching the age of superannuation which may be taken as the superannuation age for the IOC employees or on ground of continuous ill health
iii Refinery to give preference to those workmen in its employment by waiving the requirement of age and other qualifications wherever possible and it may also consider the creation of a benevolent fund for the contract labour wherein it may make a lumpsum contribution initially and then make equivalent or even more contribution to match the contribution made by the workmen of the contract labour
Having suggested these the Tribunal has clarified that these ameliorative steps if taken by the Refinery shall not be taken to mean that the contract labour has become the direct employees of the Refinery
Learned counsel for the appellant says that though the above suggestions which have the colour of directions are in accord with the decision of this Court in 13HEL workers Association Hardwar and Others etc
vs Union of India and Others   yet they fall short of the expectancies of the Union and in particular to the wide sweep of the principles laid down by this Court in Dharwad Distt PWD Literate Daily Wage Employees Association and Others vs State of Karnataka and Others   and prayed for directions such as those given to the State of Karnataka in the Dharwad s case supra
The argument of the learned counsel has barely to be noted and 472 rejected
The Tribunal has given to the appellant Union the maximum which could be given in the facts and circumstances of the case
In Dharwad s case supra the State of Karnataka had itself come out with a scheme to absorb the casual workers in regular government service in a phased manner and though it did not satisfy all concerned yet it was given a workable final shape
This Court observed as follows Though the scheme so finalised is not the ideal one but it is the obligation of the court to individualise justice to suit a given situation in a set of facts that are placed before it
Under the scheme of the Constitution the purse remains in the hands of the executive
The legislature of the State controls the Consolidated Fund out of which the expenditure to be incurred in giving effect to the scheme will have to be met
The flow into the Consolidated Fund depends upon the policy of taxation depending perhaps on the capacity of the payer
Therefore unduly burdening the State for implementing the constitutional obligation forth with would create problems which the State may not be able to handle
Therefore the directions have been made with judicious restraint
 Those casual workers were under the employment of the State and the State came out with a scheme for phased absorption and a graded financial responsibility
In the instant case before us the contract labourers are not and have also not been found to be having a direct connection with the Refinery even though it is a State for the purpose of enforcement of fundamental rights
The suggestionsdirections given by the Tribunal appear to us to be the only relief which was due to the appellant and its members in the given situation and circumstances
Therefore the impugned Award of the Tribunal cannot be improved upon
Finding no merit in the appeal we dismiss the same
No costs
TNA Appeal dismissed


Summary:
The High Court in a reference under the held that in computing the net principal value of the estate for the purpose of the Act the appellant was not entitled to deduct either the estate duty payable on the estate or the amount attributable to the maintenance of the wife of the deceased
The question was answered accordingly in favour of the Revenue
The appellant contended in the appeal by certificate that estate duty being a first charge on the estate passing on the death was an encumbrance and therefore deductible and the amount of the maintenance of the wife during her husband s life was also deductible
The Respondent contended that estate duty being payable only upon the estate passing on the death it was not a liability which was deductible
Deduction in respect of the maintenance of the wife during the life of her husband also was not permissible
Dismissing the appeal this Court HELD 1
The levy is upon the principal value of the property ascertained as provided under the Act
Property changes hands at the time of the death by reason of the death and therefore subsequent to the death
The imposition of the charge under the Act does not arise until the death has actually occurred and the property has thereupon passed
453E G 449 2
The liability to pay estate duty is fastened on the persons accountable
But their liability is limited to and will not exceed the assets of the deceased actually received by them or which but for their neglect or default they might have received
Apart from the Personal liability cast on the persons accountable and their liability to penalty in the event of default or concealment the duty payable is charged On the property itself and any private transfer or delivery is void against any claim in respect of such duty
Essentially and basically therefore the duty is a burden on the estate and that burden is fastened on the estate upon the death of the deceased
During his life no liability under the Act arose or could arise
453G 454A 3
Subject to the limitations and exceptions statutorily specified the allowable deductions in the determination of the chargeable value of the estate are the debts and encumbrances incurred before the death of the deceased
Estate duty falling upon property passing upon the death had not become a debt or encumbrance until the death of the deceased and is therefore not deductible
454B C 4
As regards the claim for deduction of the amount attributable to the maintenance of the wife of the deceased during his life there is no evidence or any finding to show that the estate had been burdened with any such debt or encumbrance by reason of the husband s failure to act upto his statutory obligation to maintain his wife
454E F 5
The expression passes on the death denotes change in the title or possession of the whole property taking place at the death
It is immaterial to whom the property passes
453D E Inland Revenue Commissioner vs Crossman  Winans  Another vs Attorney General  referred to  1978 Ill ITR 365 Gujarat 1981 127 ITR 642 Allahabad 1981 132 ITR 871 Madras 1982 137 ITR 801 Gauhati 1990186 ITR 29 Bombay Controller of Estate Duty vs Estate of Late Omprakash Bajaj approved