NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION right of rejection there is sufficient evidence of the requisite degree of control and supervision for establishing the relationship of master and servant between the manufacturer and the home worker. It must be remembered that the work of rolling beedis is not of a sophisticated nature, requiring control and supervision at the time when the work is done. It is a simple operation which, as practice has shown, has been performed satisfactorily by thousands of illiterate workers. It is a task which can be performed by young and old, men and women, with equal facility and it does not require a high order of skill. In the circumstances, the right of rejection can constitute in itself an effective degree of supervision and control. The Hon’ble Court further held that: “In our opinion, the home workers are “employees” within the definition contained in Cl. (f) of S.2 of the Employees’ Provident Funds Act”. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Shining Tailors vs. Industrial Tribunal Li, UP (AIR 1984 SC 23) held that: “The Tribunal ignored the well laid test in law and completely misdirected itself by showing that piece rate itself indicates a relationship of independent contractor and error apparent on the record disclosing a total lack of knowledge of the method of payment in various occupations in different industries. The right of rejection coupled with the right to refuse work would certainly establish master servant relationship and both these tests are amply satisfied in the facts of this case. Viewed from this angle, the respondents were the workmen of the employer and the preliminary objection therefore, raised on behalf of the appellant-employer was untenable and ought to have been overruled and we hereby overrule it”.. 6.40 Hence these Agate workers are similarly placed as stated in above referred cases decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, and they are workers of the ‘Suppliers’ and their establishments are notional extension of the establishment of the Suppliers hence these units are factories under the notification of State Government dated 29.11.2008 extending coverage to Agate Units under factories Act under Section (85) of Factories Act. 6.41 Therefore, the Agate workers are employees of the suppliers and their establishment (factory) is factory due to notional extension of the premises of the suppliers and therefore all the applicable Labour laws shall apply to them. 6.42 Applicability of the Factories Act, Minimum Wages Act, Payment of Wages Act, Equal Remuneration Act, Bonus Act, ESI Act etc. shall make the Agate workers entitled for Minimum Rate Wages; the regulation of hours of remuneration, health and safety measures as provided in the Factories Act; the benefits available under the Employees State Insurance Act; payment of wages equal to the male workers; Gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act; Bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act. They shall be entitled to take recourse to the labour legislation mechanism for redressal of their grievance and ultimately they will not die in harness unattended due to deceases such as Silicosis. The Commission is of the opinion 88 Annual Report 2017-2018