1 wp4564.10.J.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4564 OF 2010 Steel Authority of India Ltd., Mul Road, Chandrapur-442401 Through its Company Secretary. ....... PETITIONER ...V E R S U S... 1. Kisan Chintaram Sahu 2. Anand Anantram Domde 3. Ramdas Mukundrao Shivnekar 4. Anandram Dataram Thakur 5. Gautariya Mehtar Thakur 6. Mangturam Pardeshiram Taram 7. Jageshwar Dariyawram Thakur 8. Dilip Parshuram Zade 9. Raju Janardhan Dhawle 10. Mahadeo Ramji Chikte 11. Bisram Bakaram Nagpure 12. Ajit Hirderam Netam 13. Tukaram Sukhlal Aarkara 14. Sukhram Joharidas Dashria 15. Tukaram Salikram Sahu 16. Paryatan Ajardas Manikpuri 17. Radhelal Shivcharan Balore 18. Bisram Bhikari Chhedaiya 19. Pratap Ram Latel Gudi 20. Sukhlal Mansai Netam 21. Salikram Itwari Nishad 2025:BHC-NAG:5966 2 wp4564.10.J.odt 22. Ramji Bishal Sonkar 23. Raisingh Mahani Gudi 24. Roshanlal Ramlal Yadav 25. Mannulal Chituram Sahu 26. Chandramuni Budhuram Nishad 27. Chainsingh Aduram Thakur 28. Shiprasad Dayaram Yadav 29. Kacharibai Sekhuram Sahu 30. Narottam Bodhansingh Deshmukh 31. Tulsidas Dhondu Save 32. Suraj Shankar Goswami 33. Mansingh Budhram Sangerwa 34. Kishor Krushnaji Ghuse 35. Guharam Parsadi Deshmukh 36. Raman Tukaram Chitriv 37. Arjun Shamlal Thakur 38. Sadhuram Chamru Rawate 39. Bhagwan Bhimrao Ghodam 40. Uttamdas Ajardas Manikpuri 41. Kashiram Sukhdeoi Patil 42. Sohadrabai Sukhru Deshmukh 43. Shambai Mahabir Nishad 44. Bedbai Kuwarsingh Thakur 45. Premlal Salikram Dhankar 46. Mannulal Bidesiram Yadav 47. Champabai Channu Sahu 48. Baisakhinbai Bideram Thakur 49. Gyasarram Mangtu Patel 50. Pratap Dular Kothari 3 wp4564.10.J.odt 51. Tukaram Jailal Patel 52. Gambhirlal Guman Yadav 53. Durgaprasad Panchuram Yadav 54. Devenbai Bachanlal Sahu 55. Khublal Banwali Thakur 56. Ramadhar Devlu Sahu 57. Binjobai Kanwalram Sahu 58. Sirmoitinbai Milap Thakur 59. Milapram Panchram Thakur 60. Ghansham Bhukau Sahu 61. Sahdeo Mangturam Mahla 62. Kuwarlal Gendlal Lihare 63. Tanuram Suritram Pathre 64. Khemlal Latruram Nishad 65. Hansharam Mahruram Sahu 66. Jagturam Ganesh Nirmalkar 67. Ankaluram Dukhuram Thakur 68. Agasabai Kaliram Sahu 69. Sotambai Sampat Sahu 70. Manikbai Budharu Thakur 71. Mangtinbai Shamsai Mandavi 72. Chanduram Ramhu Uike 73. Bisru Devsingh Netam 74. Rewatibai Santuram Patel 75. Fulbasan Bahursingh Khare 76. Bodhanibai Jagdish Sahu 77. Kejabai Hiraman Thakur 78. Arjunkumar Kejuram Sahare 79. Dinaram Pardeshi Sahu 4 wp4564.10.J.odt 80. Sagavati Amrit Sahare 81. Bhagabai Mukundram Thakur 82. Kumaribai Shankar Thakur 83. Ramhinbai Kawalsingh Nishad 84. Shamaai Jagat Nishad 85. Banau Shivsingh Mandavi 86. Sukharam Tukaram Chitriv 87. Hemlal Gangaram Gajendra 88. Devram Domarsingh Sahu 89. Agnuram Nijamsingh Thakur 90. Dimanlal Guman Yadav 91. Komal Kanhiyalal Thakur 92. Kumaribai Agrahij Yadav 93. Triveni Birjadas 94. Gunwanta Nilkanth Satpute 95. Chaitram Mohanlal Nishad 96. Hemraj Rupsingh Sahu 97. Shatrughan Dharamsingh Rana 98. Shital Fulsai Rawate 99. Heminbai Sundarsingh Suryawanshi 100. Maniram Gunsai Ghodam 101. Janak Ankalu Thakur 102. Mohit Shivsingh Mandavi 103. Feru Santram Sahu 104. Kushal Mangtu Meharkhare 105. Budharu Ram Kuwarsingh Thakur 106. Gangaram Firangi Jata 107. Suklal Thuklu Kewat 108. Arun Ramchandra Kale 5 wp4564.10.J.odt 109. Balwant Ramaji Patil 110. Kisan Saoji Mendhe 111. Nagendra Sadriram Kanoujia 112. Anand Maroti Duradkar 113. Pradeep Shrihari Mangrulkar 114. Vitthal Kisan Bokde 115. Prabhakar Nilkant Hadau 116. Rahul Budhaji Dudhe 117. Shrawan Yashwant Nikhade 118. Daulat Mahadeo Mankar 119. Chatur Bhaiyaram Sahu 120. Sudhakr Sadashiv Lanjewar 121. Mahadeo Sakharam Kshirsagar 122. Shyam Shakaldeep Bharti 123. Prashant Bimal Rai 124. Ajai Gopalrao Sakdeo 125. Damodar Vithobaji Meghe 126. Shrihari Sambhaji Warparkar 127. Ashok Janardan Katpatal 128. Mohan Narhari Sahare 129. Gulab Maroti Panchbhai 130. Baban Mahadeo Shastrakar 131. Ashok Nathuji Neware 132. Sanjay Govindrao Mangrulkar 133. Purushottam Hansaram Humne 134. Shalik Ramchandra Tonge 135. Bandu Laxman Kuttarmare 136. Manik Bhimaji Soyam 137. Baburao Punjaram Bhandari 6 wp4564.10.J.odt 138. Keshari Joharidas Dashria 139. Shreeram Shivnath Rajbhar 140. Girdhari Thansingh Netam 141. Biselal Rupsingh Sahu 142. Rohit Gendlal Sonboir 143. Nandlal Rambali Yadav 144. Ashok Baburao Dahake 145. Jagdish Ramkrupal Tiwari 146. Indrajit Shamsundar Thakur 147. Maroti Raghunath Lonkar 148. Ashok Shankar Belsare 149. Fagguram Khumansingh Sahu 150. Pusau Paharu Nirmalkar 151. Radhesham Madhavram Patil 152. Gulab Chaituram Patil 153. Baisakhu Udayram Yadav 154. Kiran Nathuji Mahatab 155. Ajit Samaru Sonsariya 156. Tikam Likhan Motghare 157. Shankar Vitthal Goralwar 158. Khushal Moti Giri 159. Amarsingh Nandlal Sahu 160. Chattarsingh Kashiram Nishad 161. Rajuram Guhariram Sahu 162. Tilak Sadhuram Sahu 163. Rajubhai Premnarayan Sharma 164. Ghanaram Mukundi Dewangan 165. Jaipal Mukundi Dewangan 166. Ganesh Ramhu Uike 7 wp4564.10.J.odt 167. Election Mangal Puri 168. Fulkuwarbai Gopal Sahu 169. Tijiabai Jaipal Dewangan 170. Sirajuddin Tajuddin Sayyad 171. Ramsiwa Sukhram Malgam 172. Kumar Raghunath Taram 173. Hansaiyyabai Sunher Kallari 174. Pilabai Kisunram Sahu 175. Sewaram Fakira Sahu 176. Sunher Shobhit Kallari 177. Itwari Kripal Sahu 178. Pawankumar Shriramprasad Sahu 179. Dhumraj Keshav Ambikar 180. Santabai Charan Bhaisare 181. Arjun Janardan Tiple 182. Manohar Pundlik Mendi 183. Motilal Fagwaram Thakur 184. Dhalasingh Asaram Yadav 185. Jageshwar Gyansingh Chandrawanshi 186. Bhuluram Rewaram Salame 187. Ramkalibai Shivprasad Bamelo 188. Lalchand Tarachand Patel 189. Punit Chintaram Sahu 190. Khorbahara Bisru Thakur 191. Khushal Rupsingh Sahu 192. Ghasiya Deeva Thakur 193. Naresh Chintaman Meshram 194. Pushpabai Vasantrao Andelkar 195. Thanpal Kashinath Gadekar 8 wp4564.10.J.odt 196. Samundbai Baratu Kallari 197. Hublal Charan Raut 198. Lalaram Bisru Sahu 199. Suryakant Gunwantrao Chandekar 200. Pramod Ramkrushnarao Atkare 201. Sunil Rambhau Dandekar 202. Ramni Manohar Haldhar 203. Sukhedeo Raghunath Meshram 204. Anand Krushnaji Chandawar 205. Ramadhar Indradeo Yadav 206. Arjunkumar Rampratap Tiwari 207. Baburao Vishwanath Bankar 208. Dwarkaprasad Kejuram Sahu 209. Jagannath Hagruji Pikalmunde 210. Yograj Sakharam Pardhi 211. Shrikant Shamraoi Mule 212. Manojkumar Chandrashekhar Singh 213. Deoman Chokhoba Wankhede 214. Dipchand Ramvilas Patil 215. Rambai Toranlal Sahu 216. Parbatibai Lalaram Sahu 217. Shamabai Kisan Rawte 218. Malchand Babuji Gedam 219. Ramjimbai Narayan Sahu 220. Amrikabai Naryan Sahu 221. Firturam Fagwaram Thakur 222. Dhanmatbai Harichand Binayak 223. Chaya Shivshankar Mujbaile 224. Amrikabai Gopal Dewangan 9 wp4564.10.J.odt 225. Kundiabai Dwarka Sahu 226. Prakash Ashalu Bhogewar 227. Dhanraj Amolsingh Thakur 228. Saratu Ranjit Kallari 229. Barmu Sukhu Thakur 230. Jayatabai Saratu Kallari 231. Kausalyabai Bhansingh Thakur 232. Ramotinbai Barmu Thakur 233. Shambai Shobhit Thakur 234. Kisan Jagtu Rawate 235. Anusayabai Ansuram Sahu 236. Milnatinbai Gendlal Netam 237. Bhansingh Hiralal Thakur 238. Ramlu Radhekrushna Radharpawar 239. Chamru Gendlal Sahu 240. Madhukar Choukhaji Gongle 241. Gopal Mukandi Dewangan 242. Prakash Ramji Firadkar 243. Ujjar Budharam Thakur 244. Ravindra Manikrao Choudhari 245. Ganesh Dwark Soni 246. Ramesh Vishwanath Chilamwar 247. Kashinath Ramaji Pal 248. Jageshwar Itwariram Nishad 249. Gendlal Shivcharan Patil 250. Johan Bhaiyyaram Sahu 251. Makhallal Ishwar Sahu 252. Degun Pardeshi Thakur 253. Rameshwar Bisal Sonkar 10 wp4564.10.J.odt 254. Ramesh Vishramani Landge 255. Kedar Mahindra Chavan 256. Khemdeo Fakrau Ghodam 257. Gahiru Baisakhu Thakur 258. Bahursingh Ganesh Khare 259. Baratu Pandit Kallari 260. Gandlal Pahru Sonsariya 261. Bisambar Bisru Ganjir 262. Santlal Rambali Yadav 263. Bisarjan Nirath Kanaujia 264. Swaminath Bhagwatidin Varma 265. Shivcharan Gopalram Sahu 266. Jiwarakhan Mayaram Nishad 267. Shankar Soma Dahiwale 268. Baliram Motiram Kawale 269. Tulsidas Zamaji Warghane 270. Bhaulal Nidaji Bhujade 271. Nandlal Shobharam Chandrawanshi 272. Kuwarlal Hansaram Katre 273. Ravindra Ramchandra Mangrulkar 274. Dinesh Ramchandra Zade 275. Shobharam Ajitram Sahu 276. Aghnuram Sukhlal Sahu 277. Surajpal Golibaj Gautam 278. Shivram Ramji Gandate 279. Haridas Namdeo Vaidya 280. Vilas Patruji Bhadke 281. Devkumar Sukharam Sahu 282. Himkalyan Yadav Sakhre 11 wp4564.10.J.odt 283. Ankalu Ramdas Sahu 284. Bandu Hariman Khandare 285. Laxman Shamlal Sahu 286. Khammansingh Jayatram Churgaya 287. Dhalsingh Manohar Dewangan 288. Lakhanlal Kuwsingh Mandavi 289. Kamtaram Jagram Sahu 290. Ramchandra Vedram Nishad 291. Gangadhar Madhav Surtikar 292. Balaram Ratnuram Nishad 293. Suresh Madhav Surtikar 294. Govardhan Dularsingh Thakur 295. Damodar Madhav Surtikar 296. Diwakar Namdeo Todewar 297. Deorao Maroti Bandurkar 298. Tulsiram Bhagwansingh Salame 299. Mannuram Kartik Yadav 300. Alakhram Ganesh Sahu 301. Johruram Rambharosa Thakur 302. Hirondibai Dhanraj Thakur 303. Krishanabai Makhan Churgaya 304. Gitabai Khamman Churgaya 305. Mathurabai Patiram Kisan 306. Kasturabai Manglu Thakur 307. Kumaribai Asaram Nishad 308. Pushpabai Deorao Bandurkar 309. Dhaniram Hemuram Sahu 310. Pemuram Gannuram Sahu 311. Kartik Nohru Sahu 12 wp4564.10.J.odt 312. Garud Uddhav Rajurkar 313. Kabirdas Shivprasad Sahu 314. Indrakumar Baraturam Patil 315. Kodaram Sukharam Malgam 316. Parshuram Sadaram Mandavi 317. Rupdhan Ramdin Halba 318. Naresh Devsingh Thakur 319. Dhanesh Bishwanath Nishad 320. Santram Paltan Gore 321. Chotelal Bodhiram Lohar 322. Channuram Baliram Thakur 323. Tikam Patiram Kisan 324. Sudhakar Vithuji Madavi 325. Manojkumar Ganesh Varma 326. Prabhakar Ganpat Lohbade 327. Pardeshi Gariba Sahu 328. Jagdish Gyaniram Ratone 329. Pandhari Vasanta Khond 330. Pushpabai Waman Dongre 331. Prabhakar Janardhan Mude 332. Trilokbai Itwari Sahu 333. Jawahir Premram Yadav 334. Munnalal Chotelal Pichore 335. Siyaram Jagdeo Maliya 336. Kisan Aghanuram Kothari 337. Ramji Mohanlal Choudhari 338. Samaru Suddhu Sahu 339. Meduram Jivrakhan Sahu 340. Ramesh Fakira Atram 13 wp4564.10.J.odt 341. Heminbai Shatrughan Rana 342. Shobhabai Farud Rajurkar 343. Kamtaprasad Fulchand Sahu 344. Suresh Madguji Atram 345. Dhannuram Shobhanath Padoti 346. Premlal Dhiraji Nishad 347. Geetabai Premalal Nishad 348. Makhanlal Jayatram Churgaiya 349. Ramshilabai Hirderam Karat 350. Dhansirbai Budharu Dhankar 351. Upasinbai Rohidas Thakur 352. Shalikram Tukaram Ramteke 353. Thansingh Brijalal Sahu 354. Arjun Palturam Hirwani 355. Gopal Manrakhan Sahu 356. Bandu Khujaji Sakharkar 357. Mohitram Fattelal Pidda 358. Ramchandra Watuji Sukhdeve 359. Lalit Deolal Deshmukh 360. Tulsiram Dashrath Sahu 361. Surajlal Jivrakhan Nishad 362. Bisobai Tulsiram Salame 363. Samtulal Kartik Savra 364. Abuja Vithuji Awari 365. Nohardas Sewadas Manikpuri 366. Sudhakar Konduji Rakhade 367. Anand Vatuji Sidam 368. Ravi Waman Shrigandewar 369. Sukhdeo Chandulal Ambade 14 wp4564.10.J.odt 370. Jagdish Mahadeo Bhairav 371. Shankar Ramsingh Khare 372. Paradeshinbai Anandram Thakur 373. Udayram Budhram Sahu 374. Damar Bhikam Yadav 375. Dayaram Johanram Sinha 376. Alakh Dayaram Sahu 377. Dinu Girdhar Patil 378. Panchram Sukhdeo Patil 379. Toman Bhikam Yadav 380. Baba Bhaurao Kalaskar 381. Kawal Hemuram Rana 382. Kumar Devlal Deshmukh 383. Raju Mahadevrao Meshram 384. Devrao Mahadeo Chine 385. Ganesh Undraji Khadse 386. Anarbai Ghanaram Devangan 387. Parniya Khorbahara Sahu 388. Jugri Naresh Sahu 389. Gautam Panchuram Patil 390. Khorbahara Nandlal Sahu 391. Yashoda Ghanshyam Sahu 392. Amrikabai Toran Nishad 393. Onkar Agrahji Sahu 394. Chaitram Dhurvaram Sahu 395. Fuleshwaribai Kusal Sahu 396. Savtribai Alakh Sahu 397. Shantabai Mahadeo Satghare 398. Harekrshna Rukumdeo Rajbhar 15 wp4564.10.J.odt 399. Hansu Ramlal Yadav 400. Bisram Rupchand Sahu 401. Thansingh Nakulsingh Varma 402. Khumu Amarsingh Sinha 403. Raini Khumu Sinha 404. Ludram Samaru Devangan 405. Khorbahara Brijlal Yadav 406. Ganpat Bisram Patil 407. Rameshwar Jagannath Sahu 408. Pardeshi Paharu Nirmalkar 409. Sarjerao Ramaji Marsoke 410. Baburao Bhuraji Urkude 411. Krushna Sakharam Bhoyar 412. Narayan Govinda Pudke 413. Yuvraj Mahadeo Samarth 414. Suresh Nathuji Thakre 415. Dnyneshwar Dashrath Ghodmare 416. Dada Sitaram Urkude 417. Waman Khatu Borkute 418. Haridas Nathu Ghyar 419. Shrawan Odal Desar 420. Satish Pocham Gajewar 421. Ramsingh Rupal Thakur 422. Lalit Ramesh Kalambe 423. Sudhakar Bhiwaji Kathwate 424. Nagesh Sailu Desarwar 425. Manohar Parshuram Tembhurne 426. Sohanlal Jethuram Barriya 427. Kausalyabai Hublal Yadav 16 wp4564.10.J.odt 428. Punaram Ramji Thakur 429. Gopal Brijlal Madavi 430. Gendlal Dularsingh Thakur 431. Bhimrao Kawdu Dhone 432. Moti Bisram Patil 433. Prakash Laxman Nakle 434. Santram Asaram Sahu (Dead) 435. Nirbhaya Chamarsingh Rande 436. Godawari Santram Sahu 437. Kamla Anand Deshmukh 438. Fulchand Ghanaram Sahu 439. Vishnu Maroti Sambre 440. Kiran Bishru Netam 441. Naresh Pedayya Marpaka 442. Saroj Erayya Pappulwar 443. Raju Shankar Satpute 444. Panchkumari Bishnu Dudhnag 445. Ramotinbai Dayaram Dhankar 446. Shantibai Shivram Yadav 447. Jagidsh Vyankatesh Jaglur 448. Gitabai Dhanu Kewat 449. Tularam Mansaram Thakur 450. Pritam Chaitu Yadav 451. Nitin Nilkanth Pawar 452. Shankar Odal Dasar All 1 to 452 o/o Maharashtra Elektrosmelt Mazdoor Union (Lal Bawta), House of Kisan Chintaman Sahu, Near Durga Kiran Stores, Kerala Colony Marg, Sanjay Nagar, Mul Road, Chandrapur 442 401. ....... RESPONDENTS 17 wp4564.10.J.odt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. S. C. Mehadia, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. S. D. Thakur, Advocate for Respondents. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE: 17 th JUNE, 2025. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. This petition takes exception to order dated 19.07.2010 passed below Exh.51 in BIR Case No.1/2007 by the learned Labour Court, Chandrapur, whereby application filed by employer raising objection to the maintainability of the proceeding under Section 78 and 79 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act (for short, the BIR Act) is dismissed and it is held that the proceedings are maintainable. 2. The parties are referred to as employer and employees for the sake of convenience. 3. The facts which would be relevant for the decision of this case are recorded in brief as under. 4. The petitioner claims that it is a subsidiary of Steel Authority of India Limited, a Central Government Public Sector 18 wp4564.10.J.odt Undertaking having its plant at Chandrapur since 1976. Employees filed application under Section 78 and 79 of the BIR Act contending that they are working as contract labours since last several years under the different contractors sham and bogus. It is further claimed by the employee that the work which they are performing is regular and permanent in nature and to avoid giving benefits of permanency, they are being shown as contract employees. Declaration is sought for setting aside the contract labour system with direction to regularize the employees with retrospective effect. 5. The employer appeared before the Court and filed reply denying allegations and contentions sought to be made by the employees. On 30.01.2010 application Exh.51 was moved by the employer for dismissal of the application filed by the employees under Section 78 and 79 of the BIR Act on the ground that the application under the BIR Act is not tenable as the employees has efficacious remedy available under the Contract Labour Act and that the Court under the provisions of BIR Act has no power to declare contract as bogus. It is further contended that the employees being contract labour cannot be termed as “employee” as defined in Section 3(13) of the BIR Act. It is also 19 wp4564.10.J.odt contended that by virtue of amendment to the Industrial Disputes Act and on the basis of notification dated 15.09.2010 for the establishment of the employer, the appropriate government will be Central Government and hence the application under BIR Act is not tenable. 6. After hearing both sides learned Labour Court rejected the said application and held application be to be maintainable and hence this petition by employer. 7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after amendment to the Industrial Disputes Act, the definition of appropriate government is changed, in view of notification dated 15.09.2010, the appropriate government is changed from State Government to Central Government. It is his submission that once this fact is accepted, the question of the Labour Court having jurisdiction under the provisions of BIR Act to entertain the application does not arise. To support his submission he placed reliance on judgment of this Court in case of Tata Memorial Centre and others v. Tata Memorial Hospital Workers Union Tata Memorial Hospital and Another 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 869. By referring to the said judgment it is sought to be argued that in 20 wp4564.10.J.odt the said case this Court has held that the Tata Memorial Centre, the appropriate government is Central Government and as such the complaint filed by the employees under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 is not maintainable. He further placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.3147/2008 (Sun Flag Iron & Steel Co. v. State of Maharashtra and others) in order to argue that the workers engaged through the contractor cannot be treated to be the employees of principal employer considering the object for which the Contract Labour Abolition and Regulation Act 1970 is enacted. It is his submission that since admittedly the employees in the instant case are engaged through the contractors, following this judgment, the application filed before the Labour Court under the BIR Act is not maintainable and ought to have been rejected. 8. Learned Counsel for the employees opposed the said contention firstly with the submission that the proceeding under the BIR Act has been filed in the year 2008 whereas the amendment by notification dated 15.09.2010 has brought in effect from that day and the appropriate government is changed prospectively. It is his submission that having regard to the nature 21 wp4564.10.J.odt of amendment, the said amendment must be treated as prospective in nature. It is his submission that in a general rule that unless an amendment is made retrospective, the same must be considered to have prospective effect. To support his submission, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Shyam Sunder and others v. Ram Kumar and another (2001) 8 SCC 24. On the point of maintainability of the proceeding on merit. It is his submission that owing to the provisions of BIR Act and more particularly definition of employee, the employee includes a person employed by a contractor to any work for him in execution of the contract with an employer. He further drew attention of the Court to the definition of industrial matter and according to him clause (d) of the said provision is wide enough to cover the dispute sought to be raised by the employees before the Labour Court. In response to the judgment cited on behalf of the employer in case of Tata Memorial Centre it is his submission that in the said case the issue was not involved as to whether the notification is prospective or retrospective in application and only issue was as to whether the appropriate government or Tata Memorial Centre is State Government or Central Government. By referring to the judgment in case of Sun Flag Iron & Steel Co. (supra) it is submission that in 22 wp4564.10.J.odt altogether different set of facts the said judgment came to be passed wherein the right of a person to become a representative under the BIR Act was decided and in respect of the same the petition came to be filed. It is his submission that the petition does not involve any preliminary issue requiring decision about the maintainability of the proceedings under the Act. 9. The Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Shyam Sunder (supra) with regard to the applicability of the retrospective application of the statute and held that the statute is made retrospective in operation, expressly or by implication, then only such statute can be held to be having retrospective operation. It is also held that only in case of a declaratory or clarificatory provision it can be held to be retrospective in operation as its function is to supply an omission in or explain a previously existing statute. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has further held that even in the case of beneficent statute, there is no rule that construction of that beneficial legislation is always retrospectively in operation. 10. Herein this case perusal of the notification dated 15.09.2010 amending the Industrial Disputes Act clearly indicates 23 wp4564.10.J.odt that it does not apply retrospectively. This issue about prospective or retrospective application of notification was not involved before the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case of Tata Memorial Centre and as such the said judgment has no application to the instant case. The learned Labour Court has rightly taken into consideration the notification and the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act), 2010 and has held that the said amendment would apply prospectively. In any case was one more aspect deserves consideration is that on the date of filing of the proceeding, the appropriate government was State Government and as such right accrued in favour of the employee to avail remedy under the provisions of BIR Act. Such accrual of right in their favour cannot be taken away by subsequent amendment to the statute. Moreover as on the date of cause of action and also at the time of institution of proceeding the appropriate Government was State Government and hence there is no gain saying that now Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the application. It would also lead to taking away statutory right/remedy available for the employees. The amendment therefore, must be considered having prospective effect and consequently it could not affect the tenability of the proceeding under the BIR Act on this ground. 24 wp4564.10.J.odt 11. As far as the maintainability of the application under the Act on the ground that the employees are contractors employee is concerned, it would be necessary take note of the relevant provision of BIR Act. Section 3(13) defines employee which read thus: (13) “employee” means any person employed to do any skilled or unskilled 5[*****] work for hire or reward in any industry, and includes- (a) a person employed by a contractor to do any work for him in the execution of a contract with an employer within the meaning of sub-clause (e) of clause (14); (b) a person who has been, 5[dismissed, discharged or retrenched or whose services have been terminated,] from employment on account of any dispute relating to change in respect of which a notice is given or an application made under section 42 whether before or after his 6[dismissal, 6[dismissal, discharge, retrenchment or, as the case may be, termination from employment]; 7[but does not include- (i) a person employed primarily in a managerial, administrative, supervisory or technical capacity 8[drawing basic pay (excluding allowances) exceeding 9[six thousand five hundred rupees per month;] (ii) any other person or class of persons employed in the same capacity as those specified in clause (i) above irrespective of the amount of the pay drawn by such persons which the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf;] 25 wp4564.10.J.odt 12. This definition clearly indicates that the term employee includes a person employed by a contractor to do work for him in execution of contract with an employer within the meaning of sub-clause (e) of Clause 14. The said clause indicates that employer is a person who engages a contractor for conducting the whole or any part of work which is ordinarily part of the undertaking of the owner. It is thus clear that even the employees of the contractor are “employees” within the meaning of Section 3(13) of the BIR Act. 13. Now question arises as to whether they would be entitled to initiate proceedings under the Act being the contractors employee. In this regard it would be material to take note of the definition of industrial matter. Section 3(18) defines industrial matter which read as under: (18) “industrial matter” means any matter relating to employment, work, wages, hours of work, privileges, rights or duties of employers or employees, or the mode, terms and conditions of employment, and includes- (a) all matters pertaining to the relationship between employers and employees, or to the dismissal or non-employment of any person; 14. Clause 3(18) clearly shows that all questions of what 26 wp4564.10.J.odt is fair and right in relation to any industrial matter having regard to the interest of the person immediately concerned and of the community as a whole is industrial matter. Phraseology used in this section makes the said provision wide enough to cover the industrial matter sought to be raised by the employees. 15. At this stage it would be relevant to take note of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Gujarat Electricity Board, Thermal Power Station, Ukai, Gujarat v. Hind Mazdoor Sabha and others (1995) 5 SCC 27 when the Hon’ble Supreme Court has made observation with regard to the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act and the remedies provided therein. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph 67 of the said judgment has held that it is also not correct to say that the Act is a complete Code by itself and, therefore, the Industrial Tribunal has no jurisdiction to give a direction to the principal employer to absorb the workmen in question. It is further observed that the Act is silent on the question of the status of the workmen of the erstwhile contractor once the contract is abolished by the appropriate Government. Hence, as far as the question of determination of the status of the workmen is concerned, it remains open for the decision by the 27 wp4564.10.J.odt industrial adjudicator and that there is nothing in the Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act it can be construed to have deprived the industrial adjudicator of the jurisdiction to determine the same. 16. These observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court read with the provisions of Section 3(13) and 3(18) of the BIR Act abundantly make it clear that the issue sought to be raised by the employee with regard to the genuineness of the contract between contractor and employer is prima facie squarely covered by clause (b) of Section 3(18). Similarly since the employees are employed by a contractor, they are employed within the meaning of Section 3(13)(a) and therefore, it is open for them to raise the industrial matter before the Labour Court under the provisions of the BIR Act. 17. Coming to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sun Flag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. (supra) relied by petitioner, perusal of the said judgment indicates that the issue therein was as to whether the contractors employees would be entitled to become the representatives under the provisions of the BIR Act. The said issue which was totally adjudicated upon by the Competent Court had reached to this Court for determination. 28 wp4564.10.J.odt In the context of the said dispute, it is held that the contractor employee cannot be treated as the employees of principal employer. Said observations are not in the context of preliminary issue or any other claim but to the contention of the said employees for becoming the representatives under the Act. The facts in which the said judgment is passed, materially differ from facts involved in the instant case. 18. Herein this case a preliminary issue is sought to be raised with regard to the tenability of the application and once it is prima facie shown that the persons who have raised the said issue are employees within the meaning of the Act and the issue raised is apparently industrial matter, question of the dismissal of the proceeding at threshold would not arise. Similarly in view of the observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Gujarat Electricity Board (supra), in absence of the specific bar, the industrial adjudicator i.e. Labour Court herein would have jurisdiction to decide the said issue. 19. As a result of above discussion, this Court finds not merit in the petition. Hence, petition stands dismissed. 29 wp4564.10.J.odt 20. Since the proceedings under the Act are pending before the Labour Court since 2007 the Labour Court is hereby directed to decide the said proceeding expeditiously and in any case within a period of six months from today. 21. Rule stands discharged. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) NSN