VEGOILS PRIVATE LIMITED versus THE WORKMEN

Citation: [1972] 1 S.C.R. 673 · Decided: 10-09-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: C.A. VAIDYIALINGAM · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

B 
c 
D 
F 
G 
H 
VEGOILS PRIVATE LIMITED 
v. 
THE WORKMEN 
September 10, 1971 
673 
re. A. VAIDIALINGAM AND P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, JJ.J 
Industrial Dispute-Abolition of Contract Labour-Principles to he 
followed-Effect of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 
(Central Act 37 of 1970) and the Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and other 
Mannual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act 30 of 
1969. 
The appellant-a private limited company--;;arried on the business of 
manufacturing edible oils, soaps and certain by-products. In connection· 
with its business the appellant employed about 700 permanent workmen. 
fJowever for loading and unloading seed and oil cake bag! and 'for feeding 
the hoppers in the solvent extraction plant the appellant employed labour 
through a contractor. The workmen in an industrial dispute claimed inter 
alia that the work of loading and unloading seed bags as well as that of feed-
ing the hopper~ was of a perennial nature and therefore in respect of these. 
contract labour should be abolished. The Industrial Tribunal on consider-
ing the evidence before it held that the work of feeding the hoppers could 
not be said to intermittent and sporadic as claimed by the appellont; it was 
on the other hand closely connected with the principal activity of the appel-
lant. 
In similar plants in the region the work of feeding the hoppers was 
carried on by permanent workmen. On the basis of these factors the Tribu-
nal held that the appellant also shoold carry· out this work through perma-· 
nent workmen. 
In the matter cf loading and unloading of seed and cake 
bags the Tribunal held that these activities were also cl06ely connected with 
the main industry and the work was df a permanent character. The Tribunar 
noted that the comparable units in the same region carried on the work of 
loading and unloading through contract labour, but nevertheless, on the 
view that contract labour must be discouraged, theTribunal held that in this 
respect also the appellant must employ only permanent workmen. -The· 
Tribunal referred to the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 
1970, (Central Act 37 of 1970) and the Maharashtra Mathadi Hamal and' 
Other Manual Worker> (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act 30 
of 1969 and observed that these two enactments also supported its view. In 
appeal by special leave before this Court the appellant apart from question-
ing the Tribunal's decision on merits challenged the jurisdiction of the 
Tribunal to consider the question of abolition of contract labour in view of 
the provisions of the aforesaid two Acts. 
HELD : (i) The Industrial Tribunal acquired jurisdiction to entertain 
the .dispute in view of. the reference made by the State Government on 
Apnl 17, 1967. Admittedly on that date neitfier Central Act 37 of 1970· 
nor !'faharashtra Act. 30 of 1969 had been passed. 
Even during the pw-
ceed.mgs before the Tnbunal the appellant raised no objection after the 
J'.'.OSSmg of . the two enactments that the Tribunal had no longer jurisdic-
t10n to adjudicate upon the dispute. 
Under 
these 
circumstances 
the 
Tribunal ~a~ to adj.udicate upon the point referred to it having due regard· 
to the pnnc1ples laid down by the Courts, particularly this Court govern· 
ing the abolition of contract labour. [689 E-GJ 
(ii) Central Act 37 of 1970 had received the President's assent be-
fore the passing of the Tribunal's award but it came into force after the' 
9-LJSupC.l./72 
674 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1972] l S.C.R. 
said a ward. 
The State Act had come into force before the passing of 
the award. Though the contention that the Tribunal lost jurisdiction to 
consider the question of contract labour in view of these enactments 
could not be accepted this Court would be justified when dealing with this 
appeal to give effect particularly to the provisions of the Central Act 
having due regard to the clearly expressed intention of the legislature in 
the said Act regarding the circumstances under which contract labour can 
be abolished. [689 C-D; 690 BJ 
(iii) Even accnrding to the evidence of the appellant's witnesses 
it 
was clear that the feeding of hoppers in the solvent extraction plant was 
an activity closely and intimately connected with the main activity of the 
appellant, namely, crushing oil cakes and oil seeds for extraction of oil 
and other chemical production. Excepting for a few days this work had 
to go on continuously throughout the yea

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