Mess Kalyan Employees Union vs Board of Governors of Regional Engineering College and Others

Surya Kant, J.—This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 22.12.2008 whereby learned Single Judge has relegated the appellant - Union to the alternative remedy of seeking settlement of its dispute before the Labour Court in accordance with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The appellant claims itself to be a registered Union of the employees working in various Mess-cum-Canteens run by the Regional Engineering College at Kurukshetra now a ''Deemed University''. Their precise case is that since every student admitted in the University is subjected to compulsory boarding, the members of the appellant Union who are serving in the Mess/Canteens of the University are at par with those whose claim was considered by Hon''ble Supreme Court in G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Nainital Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, and who were declared to be the employees of University.

We find from the judgment under appeal that similar argument was raised before the learned Single Judge who expressed his inability to accept it for want of sufficient material on record as in the case of G.B. Pant University there was an award passed by the Tribunal under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Dispute Act with a categorical finding of fact like:-

The entire Cafeteria staff shall work under the direct supervision of the Warden/Asstt. Warden in accordance with the advise of the Food Committee and under the administrative control of the Chief Warden. All cases of appointments, termination of service and other punishments and promotions, rewards etc. shall be dealt with by the Chief Warden in consultation with the Warden and the Food Committee.

(i) All the appointment of Cafeteria staff would be made by the Food Committee of the hostel with the approval of the Chief Warden.

(ii) The leave, annual increments, uniform, travelling allowance etc. to the Cafeteria staff shall be governed in accordance with the policies laid down by the Central Food Committee.

There is nothing on record in the instant case to suggest as to who had engaged the members of appellant Union or what has been the source of payment of wages to them. Similarly, there is no order passed by any judicial or quasi-judicial forum proving the relationship of master and servant between the appellant and the Engineering College. We are, therefore, unable to accept the claim of appellant Union. The proper recourse for the appellant, as suggested by learned Single Judge also, appears to be to approach the appropriate forum under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Since it is also stated that the members of appellant Union have not been paid minimum wages, we are of the considered view that the said claim can also be raised before the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act and/or the Minimum Wages Act. Suffice it would be to say that if such a claim is raised by the appellants, the appropriate Government [for the purpose of making reference] and the Statutory Forum under different Acts shall act promptly and adjudicate and dispose of the same as early as possible and preferably within one year of raising of such claim.

Disposed of. Dasti.