JAMSHEDPUR CONTRACTORS' WORKERS' UNION versus STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

Citation: [1990] 3 S.C.R. 977 · Decided: 22-08-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA, M.M. PUNCHHI, K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

JAMSHEDPUR CONTRACTORS' WORKERS' UNION 
A 
v. 
) 
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. 
AUGUST 22, 1990 
[RANGANATH MISRA, M.M. PUNCHHI AND 
B 
K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] 
·--
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: S. JO/Contract Labour (Regula-
lion & Abolition) Act, 1970: S. ]{}-Contract workers engaged by Tata 
Iron and Steel Company Ltd. in permanent and regular nature of 
work-Whether entitled to permanent employment under the principal c 
--
employer. 
The contract workers engaged by the management of the Tata 
y 
Iron and Steel Company Ltd., Jamshedpur in the permanent and regular 
nature of work before February 11, 1981 in (I) transportation of mate-
rials within the plant which was not dependent on outside supply, (2) 
D 
processes .connected with manufacturing process, (3) removal and 
handling of waste products, and ( 4) sweeping and cleaning of machines 
etc., sought permanent employment under the principal employer. The 
dispute was referred by the State Government under s. IOofthe Indus!-
rial Disputes Act to the Industrial Tribunal. 
7' 
E 
The Tribunal held that the workmen constituted the contract 
labour and, therefore, the reference was not maintainable. It further 
held that action, if any, had to be taken under s. 10 of the Contract 
-
Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, power to take steps for 
... 
which vested in the State Government and not in the Tribunal. The writ 
petition challenging the award was dismissed by the High Court in 
F 
limine. 
( 
' 
In the appeal by special leave it was brought to the notice of the 
Court on behalf of the management that contract labour was now con-
fined to item 3 only. 
G 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court ordered: 
I. The reference to the Tribunal shall now read: "Whether the 
--L contract workers engaged by the management of the Tata Iron and 
Steel Company Ltd., Jamshedpur in the permanent and regular nature 
of work before 11.2.1981 are entitled to permanent employment in 
H 
977 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
978 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1990] 3 S.C.R. 
regard to items I, 2 and 4 under the principal employer". [980B-C] 
2. The State Government to take its own decision within three 
months under the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and 
Abolition) Act, 1970 in regard to item No. 3 as to whether the contract 
labour employment should be terminated. [980D] 
3. The Tribunal to dispose oftbe dispute within six months. [980F] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4380 
of 1990. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 4th October, 1985 of the 
Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4065 of 1985. 
R.K. Garg and A. Sharan for the Appellant. 
K.K. Venugopal, P. Chidambaram, S. Sukumaran, K.K. Lahiri, 
D. Partha Sarthy and S.N. Jha (N.P.) for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered: 
Special leave granted. 
We have heard Mr. Garg for the appellant, Mr. Chidambaram 
for the Principal Employer and Mr. Venugopal for the respondent-
Union. 
A reference was made by the State Government of Bihar under 
section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act to the Industrial Tribunal, 
Ranchi, on 9. 7.81 referring to the following disputes for adjudication: 
(1) Whether the contract workers engaged by the management 
of the Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd., Jamshedpur in the 
G 
following permanent and regular nature of work before 
11.2.1981 are entitled for permanent employment? 
(2) Transportation of materials within the plant which is not 
dependent on outside supply; 
H 
(3) All processes connected with the manufacturing process; 
\ 
-
'4 
-
y 
'\ 
~ 
... -
) 
-
WORKERS' UNION v. STATE OF BIHAR 
979 
(4) Removal and handling of waste product; and 
A 
) 
-
( 5) Sweeping and cleaning the machines, conveyors, shops and 
offices. 
7 
The Tribunal by its Award dated 18.12.1984, came to hold that the 
workmen constituted the contract labour and, therefore, the reference 
was not maintainable. If further held that action, if any, had to be 
taken only under section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and 
Abolition) Act, 1970 and the power to take steps under that statutory 
prd'vision vested in the State Government and not in the Tribunal. 
It may be pointed out that prior to the reference being made to 
the Tribunal, the matter had been taken before the Patna High Court 
B 
c 
and by judgment dated 4.9.1981 the writ petition was disposed of 
holding that a reference had already been made to the Industrial Tri-
bunal and the Award was awaited and it was open to the State Gov

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.