SECRETARY, HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD versus SURESH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

SECRETARY, HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD versus SURESH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

On facts, the so-called contract system was found to be a mere camouflage, with the contractor acting as an agent and not a licensed contractor. The Board was not registered as principal employer under the Act. There existed a direct employer-employee relationship between the Board and the safai karamcharis. The...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Secretary, Haryana State Electricity Board; Respondents: Suresh and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Review After High Court's Dismissal of Writ Petitions Challenging Labour Court Award
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; award affirmed.
Legal Topics
Contract Labour (regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970, Employer Employee Relationship, Regularisation of Contract Labour, Article 226 Review, Industrial Disputes, Doctrine of Lifting the Veil
Labour Law Constitutional Law Contract Labour (regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 Employer Employee Relationship Regularisation of Contract Labour Article 226 Review Industrial Disputes Doctrine of Lifting the Veil

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Secretary, Haryana State Electricity Board

Appellant

Suresh and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Review After High Court's Dismissal of Writ Petitions Challenging Labour Court Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board was the real employer of the safai karamcharis despite alleged engagement through a contractor
  2. 2 Whether the Labour Court's factual findings can be interfered with in writ jurisdiction under Article 226
  3. 3 Whether contract labour system was genuine under the Act and entitled to regulation or abolition

Ratio Decidendi

On facts, the so-called contract system was found to be a mere camouflage, with the contractor acting as an agent and not a licensed contractor. The Board was not registered as principal employer under the Act. There existed a direct employer-employee relationship between the Board and the safai karamcharis. The Labour Court's findings, affirmed by the High Court, cannot be interfered with absent perversity or error apparent. The appeals are thus dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; award affirmed.

Orders

  • Respondents reinstated with continuity of service, without back wages.
  • Pending interlocutory applications including contempt disposed of without orders as to costs.