"Is it permissible in the new millennium to decry the cry of the labour force desirous of absorption after working for more than 240 days in an establishment and having their workings supervised and administered by an agency within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution - the answer cannot possibly be in the affirmative," the court observed.

Haryana State Electricity Board (HSEB) had engaged 42 safai karmacharis for one year through a contractor for keeping cleaning its Panipat power plant.

These safai karmacharis sought to be absorbed permanently in the service of the board on completion of 240 days of their working in the plant and their contention was favoured by the labour court as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Upholding the High Court verdict, adivision bench of Justice S B Majmudar and Justice U C Banerjee referred to Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 and said "judicial pronouncements on the subject were unanimous that if contract labour was employed in an establishment for seasonal workings, question of abolition would not arise."

The bench, however, said "In the event of the same being perennial in nature, the Legislature is candid enough to record its abolition since, involvement of contractor may have its social evil of labour exploitation."

The court said the maintenance of the Panipat plant of HSEB "cannot by any stretch be ascribed to be of seasonal nature but a continued effort to achieve the purpose of its existence in terms of the statute."

The court said, thus, the contractor ought to go out of the scene bringing together the principal employer and the contract labourer rendering the employment as direct, and resultantly a direct employee.

The bench favoured giving widest possible meaning to the expressionsused in the Legislation as otherwise the 1970 Act would lose its efficacy and contract labour would be left on the mercy of the intermediary.

Referring to the socialist concept enshrined in the Constitution, the bench said Apex Court has frequently noted that socialism ought not to be treated as a mere concept or an ideal, but the same ought to be practiced in every sphere of life and "it is the bounden duty of the law courts to give shape and offer reality to such a concept."

It said, "the primary impact of socialism as a matter of fact is to offer and provide security to life so that citizens of the country may have two square meals a day and maintenance of a minimum standard of life, it is expected, would lead to the abridgement of the gap between haves and have-nots."