-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 478 OF 2001 Petroleum Employees Union, a registered Trade Union, ) having its office at Tel Rasayan Bhavan, Tilak Road, ) Dadar, Mumbai-400 014 )... Petitioner vs. 1. Indian Oil and Blending Ltd., ) having its office at Vasundara Bhavan, Bandra ) (East), Mumbai-400 051 ) 2. The Chief Terminal Manager, Indian Oil ) & Blending Ltd., having its address at Pir Pau, ) Trombay, Bombay-400 074 3. The Plant Manager, Indian Oil and Blending Ltd. ) D-100, T.T.C. Industrial Area, Kukshit Village,Vashi, ) Navi Mumbai-400 705 ) 4. Union of India (through the Secretary to the Govt. of ) India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi), Aayakar ) Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 ) 5. The Secretary, Central Advisory Contract Labour Board) New Delhi (Notice to be served on Central Government) Advocate, Ministry of Law and Legal Affairs, ) Aayakar Bhavan, Bombay-400 020 ) 6. Regional Labour Commissioner, Shrama Raksha ) Bhawan, Sion, Bombay. ) 7. M /s. Popular Catering Services,A-1 Arihand Villa, ) 15th Road, Chembur, Mumbai-400 074 )..Respondents Mr. S.S. Pakale for the petitioners. Mr. J.P. Cama, Senior Advocate, with Mr. M.S. Delhvi, instructed by M/s. Negandhi Shah and Himayatullah for respondent Nos. 1 and 3. -2- CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR & R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATE: MAY 04, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per P.B. Majmudar, J.): By this petition, the petitioner-Union has prayed that appropriate writ, order or direction be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by holding that the employees whose names are shown in Exhibit-A to the petition are the regular employees of respondent No.1 and that they are entitled to the same pay scale and service conditions as available to the other regular employees. It is also prayed that respondent No.1 may be directed to absorb the workers listed in Exhibit-A to the petition in the permanent employment. During the pendency of this petition, interim relief was granted to the effect that the concerned workmen should not be removed from the services save and except on the ground of misconduct. 2. At the time of hearing of this petition, Mr. Cama, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 3, submitted that the prayers made in the petition cannot be granted by this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Realising this aspect, Mr. Pakale, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioner -3- Union would like to raise an industrial dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act and would like to pursue its demand before the forum under the Industrial Disputes Act. It is submitted by Mr. Pakale that the employees, on behalf of whom the petition is filed, are the employees of the statutory canteen. It is submitted that the petitioner union would like to raise an industrial dispute so that the petitioner can lead appropriate oral evidence and produce documentary evidence before the appropriate forum under the Industrial Disputes Act. Mr. Cama has, on the other hand, submitted that the petitioner should be directed to raise the demand, if so inclined,within a period of one week as, according to him, the interim relief is operating against his clients since long. 3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties at some length. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby give the following directions. (i) The petitioner Union is directed to raise an appropriate demand as deemed fit within a period of three weeks from today. (ii) The Respondent-management shall take appropriate decision on such demand within a period of one week from receipt of the same from the Union. -4- (iii) The representative of the Union shall report to the office of the respondent for the purpose of getting copy of the decision taken by the management on the charter of demand, within three days after completion of 7 days of sending the charter of demand to the management. In case the charter of demand is rejected, both the parties thereafter i.e. after ten days of receiving the charter of demand from the Union shall appear before the Conciliation Officer. The Conciliation Officer shall submit his Failure Report, if any, within a period of two weeks thereafter. (iv) On submitting the Failure report, the Appropriate Government shall thereafter take a decision as to whether the reference should be made or not under Section 10 of the Act to the appropriate forum under the Industrial Disputes Act. An appropriate order in this behalf be passed within a period of two weeks and the order be communicated to the petitioners as well as to the respondents immediately. (v) In case the dispute is referred to the Tribunal, the Tribunal after receiving the reference shall proceed to decide the same in accordance with law. The petitioner shall try to monitor this aspect with a view to find out as to whether the dispute is referred to the Tribunal. The petitioner to apply before the appropriate Court for interim relief within one week from the date of receipt of the reference to the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall decide the same within three weeks and pass appropriate order in -5- accordance with law. At the time of deciding the application for interim relief, the fact that there is already interim relief granted by this Court shall not be taken as a favourable circumstance and the Tribunal shall decide the interim relief application on its own merit and as per the evidence on record. In case the dispute is not referred to the appropriate Court, it will be open to the petitioner to take out appropriate proceedings in this behalf in accordance with law and in such an eventuality, the interim relief which is operating as of today shall continue to operate for a further period of one week from such decision of the Appropriate Government. (vi) Rule is disposed in the aforesaid terms. P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. R.M. SAVANT, J.