Kedar Biswal And Others vs Union Of India And Others

Mr. G. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of Paradip Port Authority. He submits, pursuant to observation made in paragraph-3 in our order dated 2nd November, 2023, his client has filed affidavit dated 25th November, 2023.

For convenience we reproduce below paragraph-3 of our order dated 2nd November, 2023.

“3. As Mr. G. Mishra has already made prayer for adjournment to obtain instructions on the affidavit, we formulate a query to be answered. How is the muck and iron spillage being cleared in the plant/factory area of the management (Port Trust) or has the manufacturing process been changed, pursuant to said notification dated 4th July, 2001 as not generating any muck or spillage. It is made clear that our query is directed towards muck and spillage that heretofore were removed by engaging petitioners through cooperatives. In event the management urges change of procedure of 3 manufacture/handling or discontinuance thereof, an affidavit to that effect is to be filed, on advance copy served.”

Mr.  Mishra  points  out,  inter  alia,  paragraph-5  in  the  affidavit.  On perusal  of  it,  it  is  clear  that  the  authority  has  stated  generation  of muck and spillage in Iron Ore Handling Plant (IOHP) is seasonal and the quantity, minuscule for petitioners to claim absorption for cleaning and removal of it.

Mr. D. Mishra, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioners and disputes that generation of muck is seasonal. He wants to rely on data regarding the authority through its IOHP from year 2018 to at present. He files affidavit objection dated 6th December, 2023. Mr. Parhi, learned advocate, Deputy Solicitor General appears on behalf of Union of India.

We make it clear that our adjudication is directed only in respect of prayer (i). Basis of the prayer is notification dated 4th July, 2001. Mr. G. Mishra informed us that this notification was kept in abeyance for a while but now it is again operative. By the notification employment of contract labour by the authority for muck cleaning and spillage removal stood prohibited. Going by the additional affidavit, the authority, at least seasonally, requires the muck and spillage cleaning. As aforesaid we are not looking into the prayers for absorption and giving effect to back wages. In event, the authority requires muck cleaning and spillage removal, even seasonally, it must engage workers to do so. Contract labour by outsourcing the work stands prohibited.

The authority has adjournment to satisfy us that seasonal requirement of work by contract labour is outside purview of the notification dated 4th July, 2001.

List on 8th January, 2024. Interim order to continue till next date of hearing.

………………………………