IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22.7.2009 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Writ Appeal No.1023 of 1998 Indian Oil Corporation LPG Plant Labour Union rep. by its General Secretary 237, Tharamangalam Road Old Sooramangalam Salem 636 005. ..Appellant Vs. 1. Indian Oil Corporation rep. by its General Manager Indian Oil Bhavan Madras 600 034. 2. State Advisory Contract Labour Board rep. by its Chairman Teynampet Madras 600 006. 3. Central Advisory Contract Labour Board rep. by its Chairman Shram Shakte Bhavan Rafi Marg New Delhi 110 001. 4. P.Balasubramanian 5. Government of India rep. by its Secretary Ministry of Labour New Delhi. ..Respondents (R5 impleaded vide order dated 27.12.2004 made in CMP No.10058 of 1998). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Appeal against the order of the learned single Judge dated 16.8.1996 made in W.P.No.8394 of 1987 on the file of this Court This Writ Petition has been filed for Mandamus to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents whoever is the appropriate Government in this case to consider and abolish Contract Labour Act under Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act 1970 in the matter of engaging Contract Labour at the LPG Plant of the 1st respondent Corporation at Karuppur, Salem, for the loading, unloading, handling, and stacking and other incidental operations within a particular time and consequently direct the Contract Labour who have been engaged in these operations to be absorbed by the 1st respondent. For Appellant : Mr.K.Chandrasekar For Respondent-1 : Mr.Ravindran For M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co. For Respondent-5 : Mr.D.Sreenivasan, CGSC J U D G M E N T (Delivered by S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA,J.) The appellant/Indian Oil Corporation LPG Plant Labour Union (hereinafter referred to as the "Union") preferred the writ petition for a Mandamus to direct the second and third respondent, whoever is the appropriate Government in this case, to consider and abolish contract labour under Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. 2. The learned single Judge, by the impugned order dated 16.8.1996, having noticed that the Central Government is the appropriate Government and that the Central Government has not been impleaded as the party, dismissed the writ petition. However, it was made clear that it was open to the appellant to file another petition, if so advised, impleading the Central Government for the same relief. 3. According to the appellant, the members of the Union are performing the job work of loading, unloading, stacking and handling LPG Cylinders at Karuppur Gas Plant, which is incidental to the manufacturing operation of the first respondent/Indian Oil Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Corporation"). The Corporation has engaged about 150 contract labourers for the said purpose. About 157 permanent workmen are also engaged for the same purpose. The contract labourers are getting only 1/3rd of the wages paid to the permanent labourers and in the year 1985, they were given a daily wage of Rs.10/- to Rs.12/- per day. 4. The grievance was made that though the Union wrote number of letters including the letter dated 28.9.1995 to the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) to intervene in the matter and number of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ conciliation meetings were held on independent dates, on 12.5.1986, the Conciliation Officer closed all the proceedings. On 30.6.1986, the Union addressed a letter to the third respondent/Central Advisory Contract Labour Board to take steps to see that the contract labour is abolished. The Government of India also issued an Ordinance No.3 of 1986 on 28.1.1986 declaring that the appropriate Government in respect of industries which are engaged in the manufacture of motor and aviation spirit is to be the Central Government. On 5.7.1986, the Union wrote a letter to the Central Minister for State for Labour. But, in spite of requests and representation, no reply was received. However, the Union was asked to move the State Government. 5. It is, in this background, the writ petition was preferred as it was not clear to the Union whether the State Government or the Central Government is the competent authority, referred appropriate Government to take steps under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour Act, 1970. This Court, at the time of admission, allowed the Union to implead the Union of India as a party respondent to the writ appeal. Notice has been served on the Union of India. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 7. The learned single Judge, having noticed that under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, the appropriate Government is the Central Government and that the Central Government was not a party to the writ petition, dismissed the writ petition. 8. Now, as it has not been disputed by the parties that the Central Government is the appropriate Government to take up the matter under Section 10 of the Act, as decided by the Supreme Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. National Union Waterfront Workers [(2001) 7 SCC 1] and the Central Government has been impleaded as the party in the present appeal, we are of the view that the matter should be remitted back to the Central Government to take steps under Section 10 of the Contract Labour Act and take a final decision in the matter, after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 9. We may mention that we have noticed the fact that the Corporation is still continuing with the Contract Labour System and has not abolished such labour. 10. The order of the learned single Judge dated 16.8.1996 made in W.P.No.8394 of 1987 stands modified to the extent above. The writ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ appeal is disposed of with the above said observation. There shall be no order as to costs. CMP No.11332 of 1998 is closed. sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar kpl To 1. The Chairman State Advisory Contract Labour Board Teynampet, Madras 600 006. 2. The Chairman Central Advisory Contract Labour Board Shram Shakte Bhavan Rafi Marg New Delhi 110 001. 3. The Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi. 4. The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, Indian Oil Bhavan, Madras-34. + 1 c.c. to Mr. D. Sreenivasan, S.C.G.S.C. S.R.No.33679. + 1 c.c. to M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co. S.R.No.33528. + 1 c.c. to M/s. Row & Reddy, Advocate. S.R.No.33489. W.A.No.1023 of 1998 RSI (CO) GSK 30.07.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/