The employees of a statutory canteen (a canteen set up as mandated by the Factories Act) are employees of the establishment 'with respect' to the Factories Act. Therefore, due care should be taken while outsourcing the activity of the canteen. The workers deployed by the canteen contractor are workers of the establishment just because they form part of the operations of the factory.
In G B Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Nainital vs. State of U.P. (AIR 2000 SC 2695), it was observed that employees of the cafeteria where food was provided to the students and staff members were employees of the university. The reason was that as per the University Act and regulations, the inmates of the hostel (students and staff members) were not allowed to have food from outside. Therefore, setting up a cafeteria/canteen was an obligation of the University, and as such, the employees employed in the cafeteria could not be treated otherwise than the employees of the University.
However, in Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. vs. Shramik Sena (1999 (6) SCC 439-1999 LLR 961 (SC)), it was observed that "the workmen of a statutory canteen would be the workmen of the establishment for the purpose of the Factories Act only and not for all other purposes." This means that you can have the function of the canteen given to a contractor. The workers deployed in the canteen cannot demand any regularization or absorption provided the contract is genuine and not sham. What the Factories Act provides is that the employer should provide food to his workers at subsidized rates. The Act also provides for neatness and food safety arrangements in the canteen. Once these are met, the employer is said to comply with the requirements under the Factories Act. Outsourcing will not come under the purview of the Factories Act. Since the canteen activity is not a core function of the factory, there is nothing against the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act also.