Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ahmednagar Zilla Shet Majoor ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 7161 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 7161 Bom
Judgement Date : 13 December, 2016

Bombay High Court
Ahmednagar Zilla Shet Majoor ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 13 December, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
                                            1           28-wp6148.odt


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                           
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                      WRIT PETITION NO.6148 OF 2014




                                                   
    Ahmednagar Zilla Shet Majoor 
    Union, Trade Union Centre,
    Tahsil Kacheri Road, Ward No.1,




                                                  
    Shrirampur, Tq. Shrirampur,
    Dist. Ahmednagar                                   ..Petitioner
                  Vs.
    1. The State of Maharashtra,




                                          
       Through Secretary for Labour
       Department, Mantralaya,
       Mumbai

    2. State Advisory Board,
                             
       State of Maharashtra
       Contract Labour (Regulation
       and Abolition) Act, 1970
       Kamgar Bhawan, Block E.B.
      

       Bandra (East), Kurla Sankul-51
   



    3. Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth
       at Post University, Taluka Rahuri,
       Dist. Ahmednagar
       Through its Registrar            ..Respondents





                             --
    Mr.P.V.Barde, Advocate for petitioner
    Mr.M.M.Nerlikar, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2
    Mr.Pradeep Shahane, Advocate for respondent no.3 
                             --





                                    CORAM :  R.M. BORDE AND
                                             SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. 

DATE : DECEMBER 13, 2016

2 28-wp6148.odt

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

With consent of the parties, the petition is taken

up for final hearing at the admission stage.

3. The petitioner is a recognised Trade

Union with respondent no.3 - employer. The

petitioner moved an application to respondent no.2

seeking prohibition of employment on contractual

basis in view of bar contained in Section 10 of

the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition)

Act, 1971 ("the Act", for short).

4. In this petition, the petitioner is

praying for issuance of directions for

consideration of application tendered by it with

respondent no.2 on 09.01.2010 in accordance with

the provisions of Section 10 of the Act. Section

10 of the Act provides thus :-

3 28-wp6148.odt

"10. Prohibition of employment of

contract labour

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, [but, subject to the provisions of Clause (c) of

sub-Section (5) of Section 1] the appropriate government may, after consultation with the Central Board

or, as the case may be, a State Board, prohibit, by notification in

the Official Gazette, employment of contract labour in any process,

operation or other work in any establishment.

(2) Before issuing any notification

under sub-section (1) in relation to

an establishment, the appropriate government shall have regard to the conditions of work and benefits

provided for the contract labour in that establishment and other relevant factors, such as-

(a) whether the process, operation or other work is incidental to, or necessary for the industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation

4 28-wp6148.odt

that is carried on in the

establishment;

(b) whether it is of perennial nature, that is to say, it is of sufficient duration, having regard to

the nature of industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation carried on in that establishment;

(c) whether it is done ordinarily

through regular workmen in that establishment or an establishment

similar thereto;

(d) whether it is sufficient to employ considerable number of whole-

time workmen.

Explanation - If a question arises whether any process or operation or other work is of perennial nature,

the decision of the appropriate government thereon shall be final."

5. Since the application tendered by the

petitioner is pending with respondent no.2 since

last six years, respondent no.2 needs to be

5 28-wp6148.odt

directed to decide the application of the

petitioner expeditiously.

6. Respondent no.2 is directed to take a

decision on the application tendered by the

petitioner referred to above, on its own merits

and in accordance with law and on consideration of

the policy formulated by the State Government in

that behalf, as expeditiously as possible and

preferably, within a period of six months from

today.

7. Rule made absolute accordingly. There

shall be no order as to costs.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [R.M. BORDE, J.]

kbp

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter