IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 12179 OF 1999 Between: I.O.C.Contract Labour Union (Regd.No.714/84), Visakhapatnam, rep. by its General Secretary, M.Nageswara Rao ..... PETITIONER AND Indian Oil Corporation, Visakha Terminal, rep. by its Chief Terminal Manager, Visakhapatnam and others .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 12179 OF 1999 O R D E R : Petitioner herein is the Contract Labour Union of I.O.C. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the 1st respondent-Corporation to absorb/regularise the services of the members of the petitioner-Union as fitters and Khalasis with effect from the date of their joining with all consequential and attendant benefits. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the Union of India to take steps for abolition of the Contract Labour under Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (for short ‘the Act’). It is not in dispute that the members of the petitioner-Union are the contract workers. It is stated that they are being engaged by the contractors for the purpose of the works of the 1st respondent- Corporation. It is also claimed that though many of the members are working for the past more than 30 years and the work is of perennial in nature, the 1st respondent failed to absorb them in regular service. Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the respondents opposing the relief sought. At the outset it is to be noticed that various questions arising out of the identical claims made by the Contract Labour were considered in detail by the Supreme Court in STEEL AUTHORITY Of INDIA Ltd. v. NATIONAL UNION WATERFRONT WORKERS[1] and having discussed in detail the scope and object of the provisions of the Act, the Supreme Court has indicated the procedure to be followed. Having regard to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the above decision, this Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner herein to seek appropriate relief in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd’s case. No costs. ​_____________ G. ROHINI, J. Date: 22.03.2010 IVD [1] 2001 Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 1121