Labour Law & Hr Consultant

Cite.Co is a repository of information and resources created by industry seniors and experts sharing their real world insights. Join Network
The DLC is refusing to issue labor licence on the fact that we (pvt.enterprise) are executing jobs of the central govt.undertaking and that too within the same premises. However,they are not ready to grant us labor licence even after shifting our site office and are not ready to consider us as a principal employer.Is there any way to amend our certificate of registration and obtain labor licence hand in hand.?
From India, Kolkata
Dear friend,

Your question seems to me not so clear.What is your actual status you would like it to be? A Principal Employer? or a Contractor? From your narrative preceding the question, I think the central issue is that you want to be both ie., a contractor to your principal employer viz., the Central Govt Undertaking and at the same time, a principal employer to the contractors you engage to carry out the works you have contracted to do for your principal employer --- Am I right? I do hope that you will easily understand that a positive answer to your question is not at all possible because of the full import of the terms 'contractor', 'establishment' and 'principal employer' in the back-drop of the purpose of the Act and with reference to the scheme of the Act. I,therefore, would like to quote the following observations of the Judiciary so that you can cull out the answer yourself:

"On a careful consideration of the scheme and various provisions of the Act, it appears that only one principal employer is contemplated under the Act. ---- There are two distinct ways in which the Act seeks to regulate contract labor.Sec 7 deals with the 'principal employer' whereas Sec 12 deals with the 'contractor'.These two provisions and the methods of regulation show that a person cannot be a licensee u/s 12 of the Act as well as a principal employer u/s 7 of the Act."

Gammon India Ltd. v Asst.Commr. of Labor, (1976)I LLN 410.

" A person cannot be both a contractor as well as a principal employer."

Feroz Sons v. B.C.Basu, (1979) 54 FJR 158 (Cal).

From India, Salem
This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™