The petitioner trade unions had approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-
i) A writ of mandamus directing the 5th respondent to take effective steps for implementing Exhibit P1.
ii) Declare that the DPS workers in the depot of FCI at Mulakunnathukavu, Thrissur, are entitled to be regularised and are entitled to the pay and other service benefits of departmental labourer;
2. Perusal of Ext. P1 award which is sought to be implemented would show that the Industrial Tribunal had directed abolishing of contract labour and directed absorption of the labourers as the regular employees of the Management. The operative portion of Ext. P1 reads as under:-
W.P.(C). NO. 14786 of 2013 2 In I.D. 39/92, following the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred above this, Tribunal has already held that the Respondent Management should regulate the contract labourers engaged through a co-operative society and failure to regularize them is not justified. In this case also, the Respondent Management is not justified in continuing the practice of contract labour in operation in spite of the various notifications issued by the appropriate Government. The result of abolition of contract labour is that such labour should be absorbed as the regular employees of the Management. Therefore, the services of workmen employed in different food storage depots of the Food Corporation of India in South India where notification have been issued prohibiting engagement of contract labour u/s 10 (1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, are entitled to be regularised, from the date of notification concerning each depot. Award passed. No costs.
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Food Corporation of India had filed a statement inter alia stating W.P.(C). NO. 14786 of 2013 3 that they had complied with Ext. P1 order as stated in Paragraph 4 and 5 of the said statement which reads as under:-
4. It is respectfully submitted that as part of abolition of Contract Labour in the Depot of Food Corporation of India at Mulankunnathukavu in Thrissur District, the Direct Payment System (DPS) of labour was introduced with effect from 01.05.96. There are four system of labour adopted in the Corporation i.e, (i) Departmental Labour (ii) DPS System (iii) No-Work-No-Pay System (iv) Mate System to abolish contract labour in the notified Depots. In the Depot at Mulankunnathukavu DPS system of labour is prevailing and all the labourers in the Depot are working under this system. It is further submitted that the 'No-Work-No-Pay' System of labour is prevailing in the Food Storage Depot at Chalakkudy which comes under jurisdiction of District Office, Thrissur. It is concluded that no contract labour is prevailing in these Depots and the Petitioners are not representing any contract labourers. They are all the labourers directly paid by FCI including petitioners.
W.P.(C). NO. 14786 of 2013 4
5. As per Exhibit P-1 Award of the Industrial Tribunal, Tamil Nadu at Chennai dated 29.07.98 in I.D. No. 55/1993, the Contract Labourers have to be absorbed and regularised. They were absorbed to a system of labour in which FCI is directly paying their salary. There are no contract labour, no middle-man in between the employee and the employer. They are provided with welfare schemes like Contributory Provident Fund, Gratuity, Pension, ESI, Medical leave etc. It is pertinent to notice that now they are not exploited by any middleman. They are all under the Muster Roll and Pay Roll of FCI and their job security has been ensured.
4. As matters stand now, on the basis of statement I am of the view that there is substantial compliance of the directions issued at Ext. P1. In that view of the matter, prima facie there is no basis for the complaint raised by the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment in W.A. No. 2491/2009 at Ext. P3 in order to contend that the workers are to be engaged in the godowns in Kerala, departmentally. There is no such W.P.(C). NO. 14786 of 2013 5 indication in Ext. P1. Ext. P1 award is only a direction issued to abolish the contract labour and for absorption of such labourers as regular employees of the Management.
5. If the petitioners do not have a case that Ext. P1 has not been implemented, there are other remedies for implementing the said order.
6. In that view of the matter, especially in view of the statement filed by the Food Corporation of India, I do not think that there is any reason to issue the directions as sought for.
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.
sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE DCS