The definition of ‘workman’ as given in sub-section 2(i) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act is by and large similar to that of the definition of ‘workman’ under section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act except that an out-worker is excluded. Accordingly, it becomes imperative to understand as to who is a ‘workman’ and who is ‘not a workman’ as employed by the contractor. Let us see how has the workman been defined and then proceed further to know the bone of contention. Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act says that any person (including an apprentice) employed in an industry to do any manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical or supervisory work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied... As far as the salary aspect is concerned, it has now become redundant as far settled law by judicial pronouncements that it is not a determining factor. And why not? At a time when the minimum wages of even an unskilled worker have gone up to more than Rs. 2000 almost throughout the country, the ceiling of Rs. 500 appears to be rediculous. In fact, the ceiling of any amount will always pose problems for adjudicatory authorities. Therefore, the best course left for the legislature would be to scrap the provision of salary limit and that is why itWhen an Employee is a ‘Workman’ or Not 195 defines any logic as to why the Second Labour Commission has suggested for increasing the wage ceiling for ‘workers’ to Rs. 25,000 per mensem. There is no doubt if this wage ceiling is accepted, there will again be bundle of cases that will Pile up in the docket. The definition of ‘workman’ has been enlarged and widened in catena of cases by the Apex Court as well as by the High Courts. It has now almost crystalised to one point that it is neither salary nor designation which will decide the status of an employee ‘as a workman’ but his nature of duties or works will be the determining factor. The Supreme Court ruled that designation alone is not important to determine whether a person is working in a supervisory capacity or is a workman. The test to decide whether an employee is workman or not is to take into account his basic or primary duties and the dominant purpose of his employment. An incidental Performance of supervisory duty will not make the character of employment Supervisory. The focus will be on nature of the duties.’ Reference is made to some more cases wherein it has been clarified that nature of duties, salary or the designation are not the conclusive factor to ascertain whether an employee is a workman or not?? Determining as to whether an employee is a workman or not under the Industrial Disputes Act, there are several factors like who is appointing authority, who is paying authority, who is exercising the control and supervision, who is directing as to how the job is to be done, nature of establishment, etc. etc. which are to be taken into consideration. 1. HELD TO BE A WORKMAN Accountant The work of an accountant is mainly of clerical type, unless he is vested with supervisory or administrative duties. Merely signing of salary bills of the staff will not exclude him from the purview of ‘workman’. 1, Punjab Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. R.S. Bhatia (Dead) through L.Rs., 1975 (31) FLR 326 (SC): AIR 1975 SC 1898: 1975 LIC 1439: 1975-II LLN 344: 1975 Cur LJ 655: 1975 (I) LL] 373. 2. South Indian Bank Ltd. v. A.R. Chacko, AIR 1964 SC 1522: (1964) 5 SCR 625: 1964 (I) LL] 19: (1964-65) 26 FJR 64: 1964 (8) FLR 128. 3. Sanjiv Kumar Gupta v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 2001 LLR 378 (P&H HO). 1. Sharad Kumar v. Government of Delhi, 2002 LLR 545 (SC): AIR 2002 SC 1724: 2002 AIR SCW 1670. 2. Assembly of God, Hospital and Research Centre v. Ist Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, 2002 LLR 1030 (Cal HC); Shankarbhai Nathalal Prajapati v. Maize Products, 2003 LLR 192: 2003 (96) FLR 829 (Guj HC); LKP Merchant Financing Ltd. v. Government of NCT, Delhi, 2003 LLR 367: 2003 (97) FLR 460 (Del HC); Yogender Kumar v. B.R. Kohli & Co., 2003 LLR 1042: 2003 (9) FLR 559 (Del HC); Prakash Talkies, Badaun v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2003 LLR 1133 (All HC); Tanojkumar B. Chatterji v. Solapur Municipal Corporation, 2004 LLR 108 (Bom HC). 3. General Manager (P&A), Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. General Secretary, General Employees’ Association, 2010 LLR 957 (Bom HC).196 Practical Guide to Contract Labour 4. KH. Pandhi v. The Presiding Officer, Addl. Labour Court, 2004 LLR 409 (Del HC). 5. Management of Gajraj Estates (P) Ltd. v. Their Workman Shri Anil Kumay Agarwal, 2012 LLR 813 (Jhar HC). Accounts Officer An employee though designated as Accounts Officer but in fact he was doing the job of an assistant accountant and as such he will be a ‘workman’ under section 2(s) of Industrial Disputes Act hence entitled to protection of job security. Management of Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore v. (1) Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Vellore, (2) L. Chinnappan, 2003 LLR 595: 2003-II LLN 21 (Mad HC). Apprentice ‘An ‘apprentice’ other than the one who is not appointed under the Apprentices Act, 1961 is included in the definition of ‘workman’. 1. Sugar Works v. P.O., Labour Court, 1983 Lab IC 1185 (Kant HC). 2. Uttar Pradesh State Sugar Corporation Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gorakhpur, 2000 LLR 899 (All HC). 3. Maria Thomas Gonsalvies v. Concept Pharmaceuticals (P.) Ltd., 2001 ULR 755 (Bom HC). 4, Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow v. Labour Court (2), Kanpur, 2004 (100) FLR 1259 (All HC). 5. Mukesh K. Tripathi v. Divisional Manager, LIC, 2004 LLR 993 (SC): AIR 2004 SC 4179: 2004 AIR SCW 4974; State of Gujarat v. Chauhan Ramjibhaj Karsanbhai, 2005 LLR 155 (Guj HC). Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board, Lucknow v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Kanpur, 2003 LLR 1027: 2003 (99) FLR 768 (All HC). Merely a person has applied to be engaged as an apprentice, will not take him out of the purview of the ‘workman’ within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act when the employer has not covered him under the Apprentices Act hence his termination by the employer at the expiry of apprenticeship period without payment of retrenchment compensation. Under Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management Services v. Labour Commissioner, 2008 LLR 375 (Ker HC). Assistant Doing clerical job. Ranbir Singh v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court Hl, Faridabad, 2010 LLR 614 (P&H HC). Assistant Engineer An assistant engineer performing duties of technical nature will be a “workman’.When an Employee is a ‘Workman’ or Not 197 Uttar Pradesh State Sugar Corporation Ltd. v. The Deputy Labour Commissioner, Meerut, 1990 LLR 138: 1990-I CLR 33 (All HC). Assistant Executive in Quality Control Department Not authorized to initiate any departmental proceedings against his subordinates. Anand Regional Co-op. Oil Seedgrowers Union Ltd. v. Shaileshkumar Harshadbhai Shah, 2006 LLR 1052 (SC): (2006) 6 SCC 548. Assistant Secretary Performing duties of a secretary has been held to be of a ‘workman’. Secretary, Larambha Service Co-op. Society Ltd. v. Suresh Chandra Chhuria, 1998 LLR 1119 (Ori HC). Badli Worker When he completes 240 days, he becomes entitled to retrenchment compensation by virtue of being a ‘workman’. Sarabhai Chemicals v. Subhash, 1984 (II) LL] 75 (Guj HC) followed Digwadib Colliery v. Their Workmen, 1965 (II) LL] 118 (SC). Bank Branch Manager His duties are to check various accounts and as such performs clerical work. Hence, a ‘workman’. Sunita B. Vatsaraj v. Karnataka Bank Ltd., 1999 LLR 729 (Bom HC). Bus Cleaners They were paid Re. 1 per bus per cleaning and coming at their sweet-will with No obligation to attend the work compulsorily. Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd. (represented by its Managing Director), Kumbakonam v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Cuddalore, 2004 LLR 13 (Mad HC). Business Development Manager Though drawing wages of Rs.32,000 but not discharging supervisory duty. Pam Network Ltd., Bangalore v. B. Balakrishna, 2010 LLR 1198 (Karn HC). Cameraman Because he does technical work in motion picture industry. Marshal Braganza v. Labour Court, 1975 (II) LL] 198 (Bom HC). Canteen’s Employees Since an employer has a statutory obligation to run a canteen in a factory employing more than 250 employees. Workmen of $.B.M. v. S.B.M., 1988 (64) FJR 313. Carpenter Employed in University Since University is an ‘industry’ as defined by section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Harjinder Singh v. State of Haryana, 1992 (65) FLR 108 (P&H HC).198 Practical Guide to Contract Labour Cashier A Cashier is a ‘workman’. Ram Naresh Singh Parihar v. Uttar Pradesh State Sugar Corporation Ltd., 1993 LLR 644 (All HC). Casual Employee Because the definition of ‘workman’ embraces those persons also who may be called casual workers. 1. Ebramalai v. Mgt. of Sunplex Concrete Piles Ltd., 1970 (21) FLR 238: 1970 (I) LLJ 454: 1970 (37) FJR 396. 2. Radha Kishan Vunbrecle Factory v. Industrial Tribunal, 1971 (I) LL] 339: 1971 Lab. IC 811. 3. G. Yadi Reddy v. Brooke Bond India Ltd, Ghateshwar, 1994 LLR 32g (AP HC). 4. Narendra Deo Krishi Evam Praudyogic Vishwavidayalaya Mazdoor Union y. Kulpati, N.D.K. Evam P. Vishwavidayalaya, 1990 LLR 81: 1989 (59) FLR 701 (All HC). 5. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (represented by its Managing Director) v. Ramulu, Ex. Casual Driver, 2000 LLR 393 (AP HC). 6. Tanuku Municipality v. Venkatesware Rao, 2001 LLR 178 (AP HC). 7. Oberoi Palm Beach Hotel, Gopalpur v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jeypore, 2003 LLR 731: 2003 (99) FLR 141 (Ori HC). 8. Management of TCPB v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jeypore, 2003 LLR 557 (Ori HC). 9. Govind Goenka v. Dayawati, 2012 LLR 675 (Del HC). Centrifugal Operator Being semi-skilled only Director M/s. Experimental Sugar Factory, Kanpur v. Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur, 2006 LLR 343 (All HC). Checker Mere checking of bag will not exclude an employee from the purview of ‘workman’ under Industrial Disputes Act. Assembly of God, Hospital and Research Centre v. 1st Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, 2002 LLR 1030 (Cal HC). Chemist Though doing small amount of supervision as incidental but his work has been mainly of technical nature. 1. Burma Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Co. of India v. Burma Shell Mgt. Ass., 1971 Lab IC 699: 1970 (II) LLJ 590: 1971 (22) FLR 11: 41 FJR 361: AIR 1971 SC 992. 2. Noble Paints (P) Ltd. v. Ashok Tukaram Shinde, 2004 LLR 105 (Bom HC).When an Employee is a ‘Workman’ or Not 199 Chemist Incharge Although he can recommend the leave of others but has no power to sanction the same or take disciplinary action. Sudhir Kumar S/o Sourindra Kumar Roy v. Ferro Alloys Corpn. Ltd., 1992 LLR 422 Chief Analytical Chemist Nature of duties performed by or allocated to and not the designation is to be examined. The mere fact of being incharge of section will not make him a supervisor, S.B. Kulkarni v. Indian Red Cross Society, 1988 (56) FLR 104: 1988 (I) LLJ 411: 1987-II LLN 752 (Bom HC). Clerk He has to write ledgers, file correspondence, enter the cash book, etc. 1. Indian Iron and Steel Co. v. Their Workmen, AIR 1958 SC 130: 1958 SCR 667: 1958 (1) LLJ 260. 2. Punjab Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. R.S. Bhatia, 1975 (I!) LLJ 375 (SC): AIR 1975 SC 1898: 1975 LIC 1439: 1975-II LLN 344: 1975 (31) FLR 326. 3. Hem Raj Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan, 1993 (66) FLR 345 (Raj HC). 4. George Thomas Thakkeyil v. SCI - Tech Centre, 2007 LLR 894 (Bom HC). Commercial Inspector in Central Railway Not performing managerial or administrative functions, hence a ‘workman’. R.M. Nevlekar v. The Chief Commercial Superintendent, Central Railway, Bombay, 1992 (64) FLR 96 (Bom HC). Co-ordination-cum-Senior Clerk Though designated as Director but did not exercise such power. V.LT. Cargo Movers (P) Ltd., Mumbai v. Ajitkumar . Puri, 2008 LLR 718 (Bom HO), Daily Rated Employees Since daily wage payment is simply a mode of payment for work. 1. Pilot Pen Co. v. Addl. Labour Court, Madras, 1971 (22) FLR 337: 1971 (1) LLJ 241. 2. L. Krishnan v. Southern Railway, 1971 (11) LL] 568: 26 FLR 268. 3. P. Prabhakaran v.G.M., Kerala State Transport Corpn., 1981 (42) FLR 113. 4. Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Orissa Road Transport Company Ltd. v. Ramesh Chandra Gouda, 1995 LLR 458 (Ori HC). Daily Wager Daily wager is also a ‘workman’ within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1. Executive Engineer, Garhwal Jal Sansthan v. Chhotey Singh, 2000 LLR 902 (All HO). 2. MCD v. Narender Kumar, 2007 LLR 1277 (Del HC).200 Practical Guide to Contract Labour Demonstrator ‘A demonstrator, though designated as a sales representative but not going out of the shop for promotion of sales, will be covered by the definition of ‘workman’ under the Industrial Disputes Act. Singer India Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2003 LLR 658: 2003 (97) FLR 690 (All HC). Deputy Mining Engineer State of Haryana v. S.D. Dubey, 2009 LLR 1148 (Del HC). Development Officer In an Insurance Company, will be a ‘workman’, Ishwarlal Ramhariya v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2012 LLR 182 (MP HC). Dismissed Employees The definition of ‘workman’ includes dismissed employees also. 1. Ganesh Dass Ram Gopal v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1952 All 1992: 1953 (1) LU. 2. Cawnpore Tannery Ltd. v. $. Guha, 1961 (II) LLJ 110: AIR 1961 SC 667: (1961) 3 FLR 237. Doctor in a Hospital (Asstt. Medical Officer Class-H) Because his duties are of technical nature. Dr. Surendra Kumar v. Union of India, 1986 Lab IC 1516: 1986 LLR 12 (All HC). Doctor Mar Baselius Medical Mission Hospital v. Joseph Babu, 2006 LLR 411 (Ker HC). Draftsman Working under supervision of Head of Department. Maheshwar Singh v. Indomag Steel Technology Ltd., 2010 LLR 824 (Del HC). Driver A driver will be ‘workman’ under the Act District Education Officer (Primary), Gurdaspur v. Jagir Singh, 1997 LLR 359 (P&H HC). Employees of Municipality Since the Municipality is covered by the definition of an ‘industry’, the employees will be ‘workmen’. Howrah Municipality v. Bansa Das Dev, 1965 (Il) LL] 135: 1965-II FLR 6 (SC), Ex-Employees Such an employee is also included in the definition of ‘workman’. Benett Coleman & Co. v. P.P. Das Gupta, (1969) 2 SCC 1. See also (1971) 2 SCC 658: ATR 1970 SC 426: 1970 LIC 512: 19 FLR 32: 1969 (II) LL] 554: 37 FJR 498.When an Employee is a ‘Workman’ or Not 201 Field Inspector None of his duties are of supervisory nature. Food Specialities Ltd. v. Labour Court, Bhatinda, 1989 (58) FLR 35 (P&H HC). Food Inspector Food Inspector does not perform supervisory work. Food Specialities Ltd. v. Labour Court, Bhatinda, 1989 (58) FLR 35 (P&H HC). Fuel Superintendent His duties are mainly manual. Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Co. of India Ltd. v. Burmah Shell Management Staff Association, 1971 (22) FLR 11 (SC): AIR 1971 SC 922: (1971) 2 SCR 758. Geologist Geologist assisted by a driver and a helper was not working in supervisory, managerial or administrative capacity. Hence, he was held to be a ‘workman’. Mahajan Borewell Company, Bangalore v. Rajaram Bhat, 1998 LLR 363 (Kant HC). Graduate Engineer Though working as a Development Officer, was performing duties of technical nature. Leyland v. A. Vijay Kumar, 1982-1 LLN 528. Health Officer The job of a Health Officer is not different from the job of a Public Health Nurse. Nirmal Tejnath Dhar v. Matru Sewa Sangh Mahal, Nagpur, 1993 (1) CLR 997 (Bom HC). House Keeper Nothing is on record to show that the respondent was discharging supervisory duties, hence a ‘workman’. Cricket Club of India v. Baljit Shyam, 1998 LLR 511 (Bom HC). Incharge of Sales Section He was entrusted with the duty of a salesman. He has been held to be a ‘workman’. Delhi Consumer Co-op. Wholesale Store Ltd. v. S.L. Thakural, 1999 LLR 64 (Del HC). Jewel Appraisers engaged on part-time basis All India Overseas Bank Employees’ Union, Chennai v. Industrial Tribunal, Chennai, 2001 LLR 518 (Mad HC) (DB). Junior Engineer Not discharging any supervisory duty. Batuk S. Chauhan v. Factory Manager, 2010 LLR 598 (Guj HC).202 Practical Guide to Contract Labour Junior Officer Discharging clerical duty. Ficher Motors Limited v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, UT. Chandigarh, 2010 LLR 418 (P&H HC) Legal Assistant A legal assistant not discharging any managerial functions will be a ‘workman’ under the Act. Darshan Lal v. Director, State Transport, 1997 LLR 1138 (P&H HC). Maintenance Engineer Neither performing any managerial or administrative function, nor empowered to take disciplinary action nor can sanctioning leave of employees. Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltt., Allahabad v. Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal (1), Allahabad, 2007 (114) FIR 21 (AILHC). Malis of Bungalows of officers of an Industrial Concern Since they are engaged in work which is incidentally connected with the work of the industry 1.K. Cotton Spinning & Wag. Mills Co. Ltd. v. Labour Appellate Tribunal, 1963 (7) FLR 290: 1963-64 (25) FJR 93: 1963 (II) LL) 436: AIR 1964 SC 737, Manager of a Warehouse Since his duties are neither supervisory nor administrative in nature, Punjab State Warchouse Corpn. v. State of Punjab, 1981 (58) FIR 390. Medical Officer Since his duties are of technical nature. Bengal United Tra Co. Lid. v. Ram Labhaya, Officer, 1-1, AIR 1961 Assam 30: 1962 (II) LL] 37: [LR (4961) 13 Assam 124. Medical Representative Medical representative will be a ‘workman’ under section 2(s) of the Act 1. HAR. Adyanthaya v. Sandoz (India) Ltd., 1994 LR 737 (SC): 1994 AIR SCW 3678: AIR 1994 SC 2608, 2. Rohane Pouleno (India) Ltd., Lucknow v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1998 LLR 157 {AIL HC). 3. Rajasthan Medical and Sales Representatives Union v. Industrial Research Institutes (P.) Ltd., 2001 LLR 83 (Raj HO) 4. Anand Awadhani v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 2001 LR 357 (Kant HC). Dolphin Laboratories v. Judge, Labour Court, Udaipur, 2001 LLR 854 (Raj HC) (DB). Center of Medical & Sales Representative’ Union (North East Region) y, Vice-President (Marketing) Fair Deal Corpn. (P) Lid, 2008 LLR 605 (Cau HC), 6. Mini Deposit Collector of a Bank Performing, clerical jobs.When an Employee is a ‘Workman’ or Not 203 Dhirendra Prasad Misra v. Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur, 2007 LLR 320 (SN) (All HC). Non-teaching Staff Being a Marker performing, semi-skilled jobs. Y.M.C.A, College Sports Higher Secondary School (Sports Wing), rep by its Correspondent, Chennai v. Presiding Officer, Principal Labour Court, Chennai, 2007 (11) LLJ 780; 2007 LLR 949 (Mad HC). Officer An employee discharging duties of clerical nature, though designated as an officer, will be a ‘workman’. 1. Leena Patade-v. Union of India, Ministry of Labour, 2002 LLR 438 (Bom HC). 2. Muralidharan K. v. Management of M/s. Circle Freight Intl. (India) Put. Ltd., 2007 LLR 1115 (Del HC). Operation Supervisor Being not engaged in any supervisory or managerial capacity as neither managing nor supervising others. Muralidharan K. v. Management of Mis. Circle Freight Intl. (India) Pot. Ltd., 2007 LLR 1115 (SN) (Del HC). Overseers or Junior Engineers Because their duties are of technical nature. Vinjay Kumar Mayo v. State, 1970 (37) FJR 22 Part-Time Employee The definition of a ‘workman’ does not make any distinction between full-time and a part-time employee 1. Yeshwant Singh Yadav v. State of Rajasthan, 1991 (1) LL] 501 (Raj HC). ._Kanthaiya Lal v. State of Rajasthan, 1993-1 CLR 929 (Raj HC). . Managing Director v. Fally Ram, 1996 LLR 645 (Raj HC). . Simla Devi v. Presiding Officer, 1997 LLR 476 (P&H HC). . Coal India Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 2001 LLR 460 (Del HC). . Municipal Board, Pratapgarh v. Labour Court, Bhilwara, 2003 LLR 663: 2003 (97) FLR 747 (Raj HC). 7. Bhavnagar fitla Sahakari Sangh Ltd. v. Dhiren P. Parekh, 2006 LLR 133 (Guij HO). 8. Taluka Development Officer v. Sailesh Kumar Narendra Bhai Ojha, 2009 LLR 1112 (Guj HC). 9. Kan Singh v. Distt. Ayurved Officer, 2012 LLR 325 (SN): 2012-I CLR 123 (Raj HO). we wD ES Part-Time Sweeper Performing manual & unskilled work. 1. Kailash Chand Saigal v. Om Parkash, 2006 LLR 1134 (Del HC).204 Practical Guide to Contract Labour 2. Indian Hydraulic Industries (P) Lid. v. Kishan Devi and Bhagwati Devi, 2007 LLR 354 (Del HC). 3. Div. Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. A. Sankaralingam, 2008 LLR 1214 (SC). Persons employed at the Residential Quarters of the Officials of a Company Since they were rendering domestic services and administering to the comforts of the officers of the company. 1. Punjab Sugar Mills Co. Ltd, v, Their Workmen, 1960 (I) LL} 756: AJR 1960 All 44. 2. British India Corpn. Lid., Kanpur v. Their Workmen, 1967 (14) FLR 175 (IT). Person in Government Service A person in Government service is also a ‘workman’ under the Industrial Disputes Act. 1. Commissioner, Ongole Municipality v. Kunchala Reenu, 2000 LLR 316 (AP HC). 2. Silver Jubilee Tailoring House v. Chief Commissioner, 1974 Lab IC 133 (SC) AIR 1974 SC 37: 27 FLR 350: 1973 (II) LL] 485: 45 FJR 54: 1974 (1) LLN 271 Piece Rated Tailors Working for big tailoring establishment and piece rate system is only mode of payment. Shinning Tailors v. Industrial Tribunal, 1983 (47) FLR 406: AIR 1982 SC 23: 1983 (II) LL] 413; 1983 (63) FIR 139. Probationer Since he is kept only on trial and is not excluded by the definition of a ‘workman’, 1. Motor & Machinery Mfg. Ltd. v. Industrial Tribunal, Delhi, 1963 (I) LLJ 222 (Del HC). 2. Bihar journals Ltd., Patna v. Ali Hasan, AIR 1959 Pat 431: 1959 (II) LL] 536 TLR 38 Pat 615. 3. Delhi Cantonment Board v. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal, 2006 LLR 835 (Del HC). Under Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management Services v. Labour Commissioner, 2008 LLR 375 (Ker HC). Production Chemist As he is required to work in the laboratory to carry on-line product list, he will be a workman, Noble Paints (P) Lid. v. Ashok Tukaram Shinde, 2004 LLR 105 (Bom HC). Professional Service Representative Engaged for promotion and sales of pharmaceutical products with no managerial power. No one working, under him. A. Ram Mohan v. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bangalore, 1989 (57) FLR 1: 1989-1 LLN 913: 1989 (II) LL] 179: 1989 (74) FJR 291 (Kar HC).When an Employee is a ‘Workman’ or Not 205 Retired Employee Even after retirement, an employee has a right to take recourse to adjudicatory machinery available under the Industrial Disputes Act. LCL India Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, 1993 (1) CLR 752 (Bom HC). Retrenched Employee Since the definition of ‘workman’ includes a retrenched employce also. 1. Trichy Siringam Transport Co. (P) Lid. v. Industrial Tribunal, Madras, 1959 (II) LL] 515: 1959-60 (17) EJR 26 (Mad HC). 2. Cawnpore Tannery Ltd. v. S. Guha, AIR 1961 SC 667: 1961 (II) LL} 110: 1961 (3) FLR 237. 3. H.R. Adyanthaya v. Sandoz (India) Ltd., 1994 LLR 737 (SC): 1994 AIR SCW 3678: AIR 1994 SC 2608. Sales Representatives A sales representative not engaged for promotion of products will be a workman under Industrial Disputes Act. 1. Berger Paints India Ltd. v. Shri Chander Kant N. Raut, 2001 LLR 215 (Bom HC). 2. Management of Holy Faith International (P) Ltd., Chennai v. Presiding Officer, I-Addl. Labour Court, Chennai, 2009 LLR 673 (Mad HC). Salesman Since his duties were neither managerial nor administrative in nature. 1. Krishna Charan Promod Nath Chakraborti v. India Textile Co. Ltd., 1986 (52) FLR 289. 2. Carona Sahu Co. Ltd., Bombay v. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jalandhar, 1993 LLR 41 (P&H HC). 3. Management of Roneo Vickers India Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi, 1994 LR 253 (Del HC). 4. Indian Farmers Fertiliser Co-operative Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Union Territory, Chandigarh, 1999 LLR 51 (P&H HC). Secretary of a Society Since he was performing mainly clerical duties. T.C.C. Co-op. Society Ltd. v. Labour Court, 1989-I CLR 157 (Ker HC). Secretary in a Bank Not having independent powers which are only vested with the Chairman of the Bank. Kavitsm Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 2006 LLR 838 (AP HC). Security Coordinator An ex-serviceman drawing wages of Rs. 8,500 per month is a workman. R. Ramanujamt v. Senior Manager, M/s. By Design (Private) Limited, Bangalore, 2012 LLR (SN) 665: 2012 (133) FLR 252 (Karn HC).206 Practical Guide to Contract Labour Security-cum-Administrative Officer As he was doing mainly clerical job, he was held to be a ‘workman’, further holding that mere nomenclature of the post is not of much consequence. Kulwant Singh v. Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd., 2000 LLR 895 (Bom HC). Security Inspector Since his duty was at the gate of the factory premises and not discharging any supervisory or managerial functions. Ved Prakash Gupta v. Delton Cable India (P) Ltd., AIR 1984 SC 91: 1984 (1) LLJ 546: 1984 Lab IC 658 (SC). Security Officer Performing duties of clerical nature, has been held to be a ‘workman’. A. Sambanthan v. Presiding Officer-IIl, Addl. Labour Court, Madras, 1998 LLR 731 (Mad HC) Although performing some supervisory duties but not regularly. Beco Engg. Co. Lid. v. State of Punjab, 1981 (59) FLR 121. Senior Service Engineer Job entrusted was installation, servicing and repair of xerox machine. Held to be a ‘workman’, General Manager, Kores (India) Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Sambalpur, 1999 LLR 917 (Ori HC) Smelter Since his work is of technical nature, to smelt only. Vidya Dhar v. The Hindustan Copper Lid., Khetri, 1994 LLR 229 (Raj HC). Spinning Assistant A Spinning Assistant even though instructing to the fitters but not authorised to sanction leave will be a ‘workman’. Binny Ltd. (represented by Staff Manager), Madras v. M.P. Appadurai Samuel (died), 1995 LLR 1027 (Mad HC). Steno Typist Not doing any supervisory or managerial work. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation v. Neelam Sharma, 2001 LLR 109 (All HC) Store Incharge Occasionally discharging supervisory functions. Sikand & Company v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2008 LLR 58 (HP HC). Sub-Editor of a Newspaper Because he was a working journalist and the Industrial Disputes Act covers working journalists under the definition of a ‘workman’. Bihar Journals Ltd., Patna v. Ali Hasan, ATR 1959 Pat 431; 1959 (II) LL] 536 ILR 38 Pat 615.When an Employee is a ‘Workman’ or Not 207 Sub-Manager Working under separate contract. Management of Madras Coats Put. Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Tirtmelveli, 2011 LLR 486 (Mad HC). Superintendent Since his duties are of manual nature and designation of an employee cannot be determinative. Burma Shell Oil Storage & Distributing Co. of India v. Burma Shell Management Association, 1971 Lab IC 699: 1970 (II) LL} 590: 1971 (22) FLR 11: 41 FJR 361: AIR 1971 SC 922. Superintendent Accounts in the College Neither performing supervisory duty nor sanctioning leave. Management of Ram Lal Anand College v. Workman Sh. C.L. Yadav, 2006 LLR 346 (Del HC). / Supervisor Since he was working as a mechanic and not supervising the work of others. 1. Blue Star Ltd. v. N. Sharma, 1975 (31) PLR 102 (Del HC). 2. Titagarh Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. First Industrial Tribunal, 1982 (61) FLR 69 (Cal HC). Prenier Automobiles Lid. v. Premier Automobiles Employees’ Union, 1988 (57) FLR 649 (Bom): 1988-II LLN 686. Upper India Coupar Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. |.C. Mathur, AIR 1959 All 664. 5. Vayitri Plantations Lid. v. Babu Mathew, 1993 LLR 778: 1993 (67) FLR 750: 1993-II CLR 324 (Ker HC). 6. Rajeshwar Mahato v. The Eighth Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, 1998 LLR. 504 (Cal HC). 7. Manganese Ore (India) Ltd. v. Union of India, 2001 LLR 1135 (Bom HC). An employee incidentally supervising the work will not be excluded from the purview of ‘workman’. Shankarbhat Nathalal Prajapati v. Maize Products, 2003 LLR 192: 2003 (96) FLR 829 (Guj HC). Even if an employee was doing some supervisory or other incidental work, he will be a ‘workman’ under Industrial Disputes Act. Bellish India Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 2003 LLR 293: 2003 (96) FLR 1008 (Del HC). Not drawing salary more than Rs. 1600 p.m Devkinandan K. Mishra v. Sayaji Iron and Engineering Co. (P) Ltd., 2008 LLR 422 (Guj HC). Teacher in Factory Premises Assigned with some clerical work. w .G. Garewal v. Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Jabalpur, 2006 LLR 600 (MP HC)208 Practical Guide to Contract Labour Teacher in Handicrafts She was working as an instructor in handicrafts section of the Society. She was preparing new patterns, designs and the like for stitching work and she herself used to do tailoring job. Promodini Patkar v. India Cancer Society, 1993 (1) LL] 97 (Bom HC). Technician-cum-Designer Having no supervisory powers including sanction of leave of other employees. Gwalior Investment Co. Pot. Lid. v. KM. Desai, Member Industrial Court, 1992 (65) FLR 489 (Bom HC): 1992 LLR 911. Telephone Operator Not discharging any supervisory functions. Satyendra Singh Rathore v. Rajasthan Rajya Pathya Pustak Mandal, Jaipur, 1989 (58) FLR 507: 1989-II LLN 272: 1989 (I) LLJ 289 (Bom HC). Temporary Employee Because he is not excluded by the definition of ‘workman’. Chief Engineer (Jittigalan) Cheparrie, Madras v. N. Natesan, 1974 (28) FLR 48. Ticket Canvasser Will be a ‘workman’ under section 2(s) of the Act. Pandian Road Corporation Ltd., West Madurai v. Labour Court, Madurai, 1994 LLR 621 (Mad HC). Time Deposit Agent Cannot be termed as an independent contractor, hence a ‘workman’. Management of Indian Bank v. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, 1991 LIC 557 (Mad HC): 1990 (1) LL 50 Tiny Deposit Agents The tiny deposit agents of the bank going door to door of customers for collecting deposits are ‘workmen’ as defined by the Act. 1. Management of Indian Bank v. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Madras, 1990 LLR 164 (Mad HC): 1991 Lab IC 557: 1990 (I) LL] 50. 2. Trambak Rubber Industries Ltd. v. Nashik Workers’ Union, (2003) 6 SCC 416: 2003 LLR 820: 2003 HI LLN 834 (SC). Trainee In view of the definition of ‘workman’ under section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which includes an apprentice, e.g., a trainee. 1. Tungabhadra Sugar Works v. Labour Court, 1983 (46) FLR 10. 2. Madras Aluminium Co. Lid., Salem District v. Labour Court, Coimbatore, 1992 LLR 641 (Mad HC) 3. HB. Vinobha v. Managing Director, Hindustan Photo Films, Indu Nagar, Ootacamund, 1998 LLR 391 (Mad HC). 4. Maria Thomas Gonsalvies v. Concept Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd., 2001 LLR 755 (Bom HC).