STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, NEPAL HOUSE, DORANDA, RANCHI
LAWS(JHAR)-2018-4-4
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on April 05,2018

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Jharkhand Through Secretary, Department Of Labour Employment And Training, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J. - (1.)Heard Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner assisted by learned counsel Mr. Gaurav Abhishek. Heard Mr. Vishal Kr. Rai, A.C. to S.C.-IV, appearing on behalf of respondents.
(2.)This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
(a) For the issuance of an appropriate writ, order, direction or a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to immediately consider the representation of the petitioner and decide and modify the notification (Annexure-1) by suitably modifying the notification by bringing down the number of statutory deployment of the Safety Officers from 26 to 16 in view of the reduced number of workers employed in the factory having registration no.28977/DNB where the number of workers employed has drastically come down from 40,000 (approx.) in 1989 to 26,000 (approx.) currently.

(b) To hold and declare that the minimum requirement of the deployment of the Safety officers as governed under Section 40-B of the Factories Act, 1948, read with Rule 62-B (5) of the Rules, the minimum number of Safety Officers required to be deployed is directly proportionate and dependent upon the total number of workers employed in the factory.

(c) To pass appropriate direction upon the respondents to grant exemption in the meantime to the Safety Officers who are experienced and technically qualified to act as Safety Officers but who could not get the training in Safety from recognized institute in Jharkhand as there is no such institute available to the knowledge of the petitioner and for such circumstances the provision to grant exemption to qualified Safety Officers is contained in the rules itself for which requests has been made but in view of the exemption not being granted under Rule 62-B(5)(2) (2nd proviso), and neither reducing the minimum number of required Safety Officers as per the statutory requirement on the other hand, the respondents are threatening penal action against the petitioner.

(d) For issuance of such other writ, order or direction as this Hon ble Court may think just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner.

(3.)Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is mainly seeking a direction upon the respondents to amend the notification dated 102.1989 issued under Section 40-B of Factories Act read with Rule 6-B of Factories Rules by reviewing the number of safety officers keeping in view the man power strength of the unit of the petitioner. It is submitted that by virtue of the aforesaid notification, the then Government of Bihar, Labour Department notified the number of Safety Officers for the plant of the petitioner on the basis of the man power strength as existed in the year 1989. Petitioner submits that by the lapse of time the man power strength for the plant of the petitioner has reduced considerably and consequently request by way of repeated representations were made to the respondents to reduce the number of safety officer and for that purpose suitable amendment in the notification dated 102.1989, by revising the required number of safety officer is to be issued but till date no action has been taken. One such representation is dated 19.02.2010 as contained in the writ petition. There are subsequent representations also which have been annexed in the writ petition.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.