EPFO EO/AO 2023 General Ability Test · Question 68 of 120

Correct — D, (d) The work is of intermittent nature. The word 'not' is printed in bold italics in the stem: the item asks which nature of work shall NOT be taken into account, so the three factors the statute lists are the wrong answers and the one it does not list is the right one. The provision is section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. Sub-section (1) gives the appropriate Government the power, after consultation with the Central Board or a State Board, to prohibit by notification in the Official Gazette the employment of contract labour in any process, operation or other work in any establishment. Sub-section (2) tells it what to weigh first: before issuing such a notification the appropriate Government 'shall have regard to the conditions of work and benefits provided for the contract labour in that establishment and other relevant factors, such as' — (a) whether the process, operation or other work is incidental to, or necessary for, the industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation carried on in the establishment; (b) whether it is of perennial nature, that is to say, whether it is of sufficient duration having regard to the nature of that industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation; (c) whether it is done ordinarily through regular workmen in that establishment or an establishment similar thereto; (d) whether it is sufficient to employ a considerable number of whole-time workmen. An Explanation adds that if a question arises whether any work is of perennial nature, the decision of the appropriate Government on it is final. Options (a), (b) and (c) of this question are clauses (a), (b) and (c) of that list — with the paper rendering the statute's 'perennial' as 'permanent', which is a fair paraphrase of what perennial means here. Intermittent work is nowhere in section 10(2), and it could not be: the four listed factors all point the same way, towards work that is regular, lasting and central enough to the establishment that it ought to be done by its own employees. Intermittent work is the opposite of perennial, so treating it as a ground for prohibition would invert the section. The word does appear in the Act, which is what makes the option plausible. Section 1(5)(a) provides that the Act 'shall not apply to establishments in which work only of an intermittent or casual nature is performed', with the appropriate Government deciding any dispute about that after consulting the Board, and an Explanation that work is not intermittent if it was performed for more than one hundred and twenty days in the preceding twelve months, or, being seasonal, for more than sixty days in a year. So intermittent work is a reason the Act does not apply at all — a threshold question under section 1 — and never a factor to be weighed under section 10.

• (a)The process, operation or other work is incidental to or necessary for the industry — This IS a listed factor, so it cannot answer a 'shall not be taken into account' stem. It is section 10(2)(a) almost word for word: whether the process, operation or other work is incidental to, or necessary for, the industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation that is carried on in the establishment. The logic is that contract labour is hardest to justify where the work is part of what the establishment exists to do, rather than an outside service bought in.
• (b)The work is of a permanent nature — This IS a listed factor, in section 10(2)(b), where the statute's own word is 'perennial' — defined in the same clause as being of sufficient duration having regard to the nature of the industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation carried on in the establishment. 'Permanent' as the paper prints it is a paraphrase of that, not a different test. Note how much turns on this clause: the Explanation to section 10(2) makes the appropriate Government's decision on whether work is of perennial nature final, so it is the factor most often fought over in practice.
• (c)The work is done ordinarily through regular workmen — This IS a listed factor, in section 10(2)(c): whether the work is done ordinarily through regular workmen in that establishment or an establishment similar thereto. The comparison with a similar establishment is the part worth remembering, because it lets the Government look beyond the practice of the employer before it — an employer cannot defeat the factor merely by having always used contractors himself if comparable establishments use their own workmen for the same work.

The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 does two things its title announces separately. It regulates contract labour where it is allowed — registration of establishments under section 7, licensing of contractors under section 12, canteens, rest rooms, drinking water, latrines and first aid under sections 16 to 19, and liability on the principal employer under sections 20 and 21 where the contractor defaults. And it provides for abolition, in section 10, by empowering the appropriate Government to prohibit contract labour in a given process or operation in a given establishment after consulting the Central or a State Advisory Board. Section 10(2) disciplines that power with a checklist: conditions of work and benefits provided to the contract labour, and then four factors — is the work incidental or necessary to the industry, is it perennial, is it ordinarily done by regular workmen, and is there enough of it to employ a considerable number of whole-time workmen. The Act's reach is set by section 1(4): it applies to establishments and to contractors employing twenty or more workmen, extendable downwards on not less than two months' notice, and by section 1(5), which keeps it away from establishments where only intermittent or casual work is done.

Section 10 is the most consequential provision in the Act and the one EPFO asks about most, because an Enforcement Officer's world is the gap between contract labour that is lawful and contract labour that ought to be prohibited. The examiner's method here is the standard one for a statutory list: print three items of the list as options, add a fourth that sounds as though it belongs, and ask which is not there. The habit rewarded is knowing lists as lists — their length and their order — rather than recognising individual items, because recognition alone will make all four options feel familiar.

• Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, section 10(1) — the appropriate Government may, after consultation with the Central Board or a State Board, prohibit employment of contract labour in any process, operation or other work in any establishment, by notification in the Official Gazette.
• Section 10(2) — before issuing such a notification the Government must have regard to the conditions of work and benefits provided for the contract labour, and to four other factors.
• Section 10(2)(a) — whether the work is incidental to, or necessary for, the industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation carried on in the establishment.
• Section 10(2)(b) — whether it is of perennial nature, that is, of sufficient duration having regard to the nature of that industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation.
• Section 10(2)(c) — whether it is done ordinarily through regular workmen in that establishment or an establishment similar thereto.
• Section 10(2)(d) — whether it is sufficient to employ a considerable number of whole-time workmen.
• Explanation to section 10(2) — where a question arises whether work is of perennial nature, the decision of the appropriate Government is final.
• Section 1(5)(a) — the Act does not apply to establishments in which work only of an intermittent or casual nature is performed; work is not intermittent if performed for more than 120 days in the preceding twelve months, or, being seasonal, for more than 60 days in a year.
• Section 1(4) — the Act applies to establishments and contractors employing twenty or more workmen, with power to extend it lower on not less than two months' notice.

• Answering the positive question. The 'not' is in bold italics — three of these four options are in the statute.
• Rejecting option (b) because the statute says 'perennial' and the paper says 'permanent'. That is a paraphrase of section 10(2)(b), not a different test.
• Forgetting that 'intermittent' really is in the Act, in section 1(5)(a), where it decides whether the Act applies at all rather than whether contract labour should be prohibited.
• Treating prohibition under section 10 as automatic once the factors are met. The section confers a discretion exercisable by notification after consulting the Board, not a duty.

The EO/AO labour-law block tests statutory lists by omission and by number — which item is not on the list, how many members a Board has, how many days a period runs. For this Act, learn section 1 and section 10 as one page, with the numbers twenty, one hundred and twenty and sixty from section 1 and the four factors from section 10(2), and most of what the paper asks about contract labour is covered.

No directly related past PYQ was found.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Under section 1(5) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, work performed in an establishment shall not be deemed to be of an intermittent nature if it was performed for more than :

  • (a)Sixty days in the preceding twelve months
  • (b)Ninety days in the preceding twelve months
  • (c)One hundred and twenty days in the preceding twelve months
  • (d)Two hundred and forty days in the preceding twelve months

  Answer(c) One hundred and twenty days in the preceding twelve months

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Before prohibiting the employment of contract labour in an establishment under section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, the appropriate Government must consult :

  • (a)The Central Board or the State Board, as the case may be
  • (b)The Industrial Tribunal having jurisdiction
  • (c)The Chief Labour Commissioner
  • (d)The registered trade unions in the establishment

  Answer(a) The Central Board or the State Board, as the case may be