^!^^ t..^- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR. WRIT PETITION NO./'^/^ OF 2006. PETITIONER \.^•^ ^ /•:'^-" *' °^/ ^- -":^-'\ .-•'' >^<^ •'..^y ^^-" <^r/ 'y RESPONDENTS 1. All India .Engineers & General Mazdoor Union having its Registered Office at Registration No. 2566 through its Secretary General, E - 127, Karampura, New Delhi 110015. 2^" Shri K K Shukla, Son of late Sri Balgovind Shukla, E - 127, Karampura, New Delhi 110 015. VERSUS ^y.v^ w^':^.- '•3^> '"-•. .^s-s^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh through the ^- Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur. 2, The Commissioner (Excise), Chhattisgarh, Excise Office, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). 3. M/s. Kedia Castle Delleon Industries ^ Ltd, Kumhari, District: Durg (CG). 4. The Labour Commissioner, ^ Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG). 5. ^ 6. Excise Warehouse, Raipur Road, Bilaspur. Excise Warehouse, Sakti, District District Janjgir-Champa (CG). 7. Excise Warehouse, Baloda Bazar, ^District Raipur 8. 9. Excise Warehouse, Kedia Distilleries Bilaspur Excise Warehouse, Mungeli, ^' District Bilaspur. r WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, ORDER / ORDERS. DIRECTION / DIRECTIONS Hon'bie Shri Satish 18 01 'lUSUiii Ai! india Encinsers & General Mazdoor Unlon and another Versus State of Chha'itisgarh and othere. S'nn K. s. Marnas, counse! ror the penaoners. Shri Satish Gupta, Deputy G.A. ror The State' respondents No.1, ^ £ .S.A •"'. z, 4'(o a. Shri Abhishekh Sinha, counssi fcr respondsnt No.3. O R O E R ^idtf' &£S£ £; . (Passed on 10'" Day of-January, 2007) The petitioners were appointsd as Labourers bv the C-ontractors worklng in the varlous Warehouses of the State Government. Bv wav of this writ petition, fhe pefiflonsrs seek fhe foliowing reiiefs : "7.1 To issue a writ in t'ne naturs of mandamus directing the respondents to departmentaiize the iabour empioyed in the Warshouse under ths control of respondent Exsise Department and engage in xhe '^r:^y'?a^'}iftn rif ?s<&,%i=!"inir'-"l ^ftlfM u'irs;^ r^Hnr'-iri;^ Hi&r^n'ri^ •'^/h'V: •SS.'s.l'^'S VI S?-£?-S'C;'^••i2 :^; <.f^i</';*-;i ii i^ ; ; •SSU^'tuiH i\^ ] •upi%?^ 1»^U Sy anci u^mats'y boffling, ssaiing and iabefing. 7.2. A'ternal.iveiy to issue a mandamus to ths respondents to snsure the comDiiance of a!l the Labour Laws inciuding the Factory Act, Payment of Gratuity Act and the bensfits of Emplpyees Provident Funds (IViscelianeous Provision Act) and o'ihsr termina! benefits as payable to the departrnentai labours. 7.3 To issue a writ of mandamus to the resDondents to ensure besides the above benefits the coRtinui'ty of service snd sen'ice conditions. -2.' 7.4 This Hon'bie Court be pleased to direct the respondents by issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus for making payment of outstanding arrears to the members of the petitioner's unton with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of approval tiii payment. 7.5 Thss Hon'bte Court 'oe pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the authorities to comply w!th the provisions of Labour Enactments in so far as arrangement for tabour faciilties ar®concerned. 7.6 Any ofher relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in t'ne facts and circumstances of the case may also kind'y be passed in ravour of the members of the pe'Btioner's Union and against the rsspondents. ^ (2) The first reiief is wrth rsgard to the direction to the respondents to departi-rientaijze ths labour empioysd in 'the Warehouse under the contt'oi of rsspondent - Exctse Department. The second aiternative reiief is for a direction to the respondents to ensure the compliance of ail the Labour Lavvs. Ths above stated reiiefs cannot be granted on the sole ground i'hat the appointment of the members or the petrcioner's union is not in accordance with the constitutionai scheme or the empjoyment. The members of the pstitioner's union were appointed by the privats contractors for workina in the GovernmentWarehouses. (3) in visw of the settied posttion of tew that the employees appojnte; cte hors of constitutiona! scheme of smployment or noi: in accordance wjth the ruies, reguiations and circuiars as framed under the proviso to Articie 309 of ths Constitution of india, have no right to the post. Granting the sbove reiisfs means sranting a directjon to the respondsnts to reguiarise -^- ^.uW^ the members of the petitioner's uniors who v/ere not appointed in tccordance vvith iaw. (4) With the regard to the applicabiiity of Labour Laws, the petitioner's union is at libeny to approach the appropriate forum. The said relief cannot be grantsd by this Court in exerciss of its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of Iridia. The pstition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishKAgnihotri Judge