Case: Bombay Oxygen Corporation Vs. Girish Nagesh Suvarna and Another

These two appeals arise out of the proceedings initiated before the Labour Court in two references. The case putforth by the respondents-workmen is that they were working as Courier servicemen since 1984 and their last drawn salary was Rs.600/- per month. Each of them claimed to have worked for four years without break since 1983/1984. The contention putforth on behalf of the appellants is that they were engaged on contract basis and they were not workmen. The Labour Court as well as the High Court on consideration of the evidence adduced before it came to the conclusion as follows: "The witness has admitted that at the time of appointment of these two workmen, the company had not required them to submit any rates for carrying out the courier service. No contract was entered into with these two workmen. The workmen were not submitting any bills for the work done. he has also admitted that the company was paying travelling expenses to these two workmen. On the basis of these materials, the learned Judge of the Labour Court had come to the conclusion that both these individuals are workman and there is a relationship of an employer and employee between the company and these workmen and, therefore, it is an industrial dispute. The Labour Court has come to the conclusion that both the workmen were doing the work of courier service as per the directions of the company in a specified manner. The work was clearly connected with the officers of the company and the services of the two workmen were terminated on 26.11.1989 without assigning any reasons." *

Decision reasoning: 1[ds]The contention putforth on behalf of the appellants is that they were engaged on contract basis and they were not workmen. The Labour Court as well as the High Court on consideration of the evidence adduced before it came to the conclusion aswitness has admitted that at the time of appointment of these two workmen, the company had not required them to submit any rates for carrying out the courier service. No contract was entered into with these two workmen. The workmen were not submitting any bills for the work done. he has also admitted that the company was paying travelling expenses to these two workmen. On the basis of these materials, the learned Judge of the Labour Court had come to the conclusion that both these individuals are workman and there is a relationship of an employer and employee between the company and these workmen and, therefore, it is an industrial dispute. The Labour Court has come to the conclusion that both the workmen were doing the work of courier service as per the directions of the company in a specified manner. The work was clearly connected with the officers of the company and the services of the two workmen were terminated on 26.11.1989 without assigning any reasons." *