THE JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND REGISTERING OFFICER & ANR. versus KESAR LAL

Citation: [2020] 5 S.C.R. 176 · Decided: 17-03-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
176
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 5 S.C.R.
THE JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER
AND REGISTERING OFFICER & ANR.
v.
KESAR LAL
(Civil Appeal No. 2014 of 2020)
MARCH 17, 2020
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD
AND AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.2(d) and 2(1)(o)–
‘Consumer’– If includes beneficiary of a statutory welfare scheme
– Parliament enacted 1996 Act to regulate employment, service
conditions of building & other construction workers and also to
provide for their safety, health & welfare measures – Pursuant
thereto, State of Rajasthan framed 2009 Rules – Rajasthan
Building & Other Construction Workers Welfare Board was
constituted – One of the schemes formulated by Board for
beneficiaries registered under the Act rendered financial assistance
on the occasion of marriage of a beneficiary’s daughter –
Respondent obtained Labour Beneficiary Identity Card from
appellants after depositing Rs.25 as registration fee and Rs.60 as
annual contribution – Submitted application for availing financial
aid for the marriage of his daughter – Rejected – District Forum
dismissed respondent’s complaint – Order set aside by State
Commission – Affirmed by NCDRC – Held: Functions of the Board
squarely fall within the definition of ‘service’ within the meaning
of s.2(1)(o) – Exception is a service rendered free of charge –
Workers registered under 1996 Act are beneficiaries of schemes
made by the Board – Upon registration, every worker is required
to make a contribution to the fund at such rate per month as may
be prescribed by State government – Fund is applied inter alia for
meeting the expenses incurred to fulfill the objects & purposes
authorized by legislation – True test is not whether the amount
contributed by beneficiary is adequate to defray the entire cost of
expenditure envisaged under the scheme – So long as the service
rendered is not free of charge, any deficiency of service is amenable
to the fora for redressal constituted under Consumer Act–
u/s.2(1)(d), a ‘consumer’ includes not only a person who has hired
   [2020] 5 S.C.R. 176
176
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
177
or availed of service but even a beneficiary of a service – Public
authorities such as the appellants constituted under an enactment
of Parliament are entrusted with a solemn duty of providing welfare
services to registered workers – Public accountability is a
significant consideration underlying the provisions of Consumer
Act – No reason to interfere with State Commission’s decision to
award the claim, subject to modification of rate of interest by
NCDRC– Building and Other Construction Workers’(Regulation of
Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 – ss.2(b), (k),
11, 12, 16-18, 22, 24 – Building and Other Construction Workers’
(Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules,1998
– Rajasthan Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation
of Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2009 – rr.43-45,
52, 58 – Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess
Act, 1996.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 In relation to a service, the definition of the
expression incorporates in the first part any person who hires
or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid
or promised (wholly or in part). In its latter component, the
definition includes the beneficiary of such a service other than
the person who actually avails of the service for consideration
paid or promised, so long as such services are availed of with
the approval of the person who hires or avails of the service for
consideration. The ambit of the first component of the
expression in Section 2(d)(ii) is expanded by the inclusive
definition in the latter component. The expression ‘beneficiary’
is defined in Section 2(b), Building and Other Construction
Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service)
Act, 1996 to mean ‘a building worker registered under Section
12’. The expression ‘fund’ is defined in Section 2(k) to mean
‘the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Fund of
a Board constituted under sub-section (1) of Section 24’. Hence,
every building worker who is registered as a beneficiary under
the enactment is entitled to the benefits provided by the Board
from the fund. The effect of a non-payment of the contribution
under sub-section (1) of Section 16 for a continuous period of
not less than one year is that under Section 17 the individual
ceases to be a beneficiary. However, under the proviso, a person
JOINT L

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