Delhi High Court
Food Corporation Of India Workers ... vs Ministry Of Labour & Employment ... on 31 October, 2014
$~46
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 31st October, 2014
+ W.P.(C) No.7428/2014
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA WORKERS UNION ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr.Arvind Nayar, Mr. Vikas
Kumar and Mr. Manisal
Paliwal, Advocates.
Versus
MINISTRY OF LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT REPRESENTED BY:
ITS SECRETARY & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Anil Soni, CGSC and
Mr. Naginder Benipal,
Advocate for Respondent
Nos. 1 and 3.
Mr.Om Prakash, Advocate
for Respondent No.4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
CM No.17623/2014 (for exemption)
Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.7428/2014
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner Union has assailed the
letter dated 16.10.2014, whereby the Secretary ( CACLB), Ministry of
Labour & Employment, Government of India, passed the order as under:-
"2. You may make yourself present on the aforesaid
date and time or send a representative with authority
letter before the Board to plead your case. Being a
CACLB matter, it may be noted that no further
adjournment will be granted and a decision will be taken
ex-parte, if either party does not appear before the
Board. If any party wishes to submit additional written
submissions, if any, then only they are required to give
25 copies of the same at the time of the meeting for
circulation among the members of the Board. Keeping in
view the functional difficulties, it may not be possible to
allow more than two (2) persons for each item. Kindly
confirm the Name/Address and Telephone No. of the
person who will attend the meeting. Your co-operation is
also accordingly solicited."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Union while relying upon
Section 31 of The Contract Labour (Regular and Abolition) Act, 1970,
submits that the process initiated by the respondents is contrary to the
provisions of the aforementioned Section and even the present notice has
been issued in contravention of Section 31 of the said Act.
3. Perusal of the said letter reveals that all the concerned including the
petitioner Union were given liberty to be present on the date and time or
send their representatives with authority letter before the Board to plead
their case. It is further stated that if any party wishes to submit additional
written statement, if any, they are required to give 25 copies of the same
at the time of Meeting for circulation among the members of the Board.
4. As informed, Meeting was fixed for today at Kolkata and it is
submitted by learned counsel for the respondents, who appear on advance
notice, the representatives of the petitioner Union participated in the said
Meeting. Accordingly, decision taken by the respondents shall be
communicated to the petitioner Union.
5. Learned counsels for the respondents further submit that the
Minutes of the Board Meeting shall be sent to all the concerned parties
and thereafter to the appropriate Department of the Central Government
and only thereafter, the appropriate Government will take decision on the
recommendations of the Advisory Board. Therefore, the present petition
is filed prematurely.
6. Since the respondents authorities have not taken the final decision,
I am of the considered opinion that the present petition has been filed pre-
maturely.
7. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed with liberty to
challenge the decision, taken by the Central Government, if the petitioner
still feels aggrieved.
CM No. 17624/2014
With the dismissal of the instant petition, this application has
become infructuous. The same is accordingly dismissed.
SURESH KAIT
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 31, 2014
sb
