Chaitanya Bhoi And Others vs Union Of India And Others

Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioners. He submits, his clients have been disengaged by impugned order, inter alia, dated 20th December, 2021 passed on behalf of Deputy General Manager, Food Corporation of India (FCI). He submits, the disengagement is illegal.

For the work of providing security, there was no notification under section 10(1) in Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. Hence, his clients working as such under the contractor, stood protected on their engagement by interim order dated 24th October, 2019.

On their only being part compliance of said order, some of those engaged through contractors to provide security had again moved this Court by WP(C) no.25194 of 2020, disposed of by order dated 8th October, 2020. Coordinate Bench, in that order, recorded that direction made in the interim order stood violated in respect of workers of Jatani, Phulbani, Kesinga, Dungripali, Titilagarh, Balijhari, Burla, Sambalpur and one of Jagannathpur depots of FCI. The order goes on to record that to avoid the discrimination, Regional Labour Commissioner had issued show cause notice dated 18th February, 2020. He submits, a further show cause notice was issued by the Commissioner on 5th January, 2021, with reference to said order dated 8th October, 2020. In spite thereof, pursuant to impugned order dated 20th December, 2021 his clients have been disengaged, for engagement of Ex-Servicemen under purported policy of FCI. He submits, his clients ventilated their grievance under section 33 in Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He draws attention to annexure-13, being record of conciliation proceeding held on 28th October, 2019. He submits, the conciliation proceeding is also pending.

He submits further, there is another order and its consequence, by which his clients also are protected. It is order dated 1st February, 2022 passed by coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) no.2971 of 2022. Paragraph-4 from said order is reproduced below.

“4. It is submitted that, during pendency of the Conciliation Proceeding, the petitioners are entitled to protection. While the Conciliation Proceeding is pending before the Competent Authority, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage. But we deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition with the observation that, the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Bhubaneswar, before whom the Conciliation Proceeding under Section-33 of the Act is pending may take up the issue on being moved for giving statutory protection to the petitioners with reference to Order dtd. 05.01.2021 under Annexure-12.”

He seeks interference.

Mr. Nayak, learned advocate, Central Government Counsel appears on behalf of the corporation and submits, the section 33 proceeding is pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court at Bhubaneswar (CGIT).

We notice, the first Division Bench of this Court passed order dated 9th September, 2021 in, inter alia, one of the writ petitions mentioned above. By the order, said interim order dated 24th October, 2019 and another order dated 14th November, 2019 stood vacated. Petitioners must consider their position based on claiming protection under said order, vacated by order dated 9th September, 2021.

In view of aforesaid, petitioners must find their remedy in the section 33 proceeding or by invoking any other provision as available remedy under the Act.

With above observation, the writ petition is disposed of.

…………………………..