Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 1978 (2) TMI SC This
Issues Involved:
1. Definition of "Industry" under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 2. Applicability of the definition to various entities such as hospitals, charitable institutions, research institutes, educational institutions, liberal professions, clubs, and governmental functions. Detailed Analysis: 1. Definition of "Industry" under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 The court examined the broad definition of "industry" under Section 2(j) and emphasized that it includes any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture, or calling of employers and any calling, service, employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen. The court noted that these are words of wide import deliberately used by the legislature. 2. Applicability of the Definition to Various Entities Hospitals: The court held that hospitals, including those run by the government, are industries. This was reaffirmed by the decision in the Hospital Mazdoor Sabha case, which stated that the character of the activity and not the entity conducting it determines whether it is an industry. Hospitals provide a material service to the community, and the cooperation between the employer and employees in providing this service qualifies them as industries. Charitable Institutions: The court categorized charitable institutions into three types: - First Category: Enterprises yielding profits diverted for charitable purposes are industries. - Second Category: Institutions making no profit but hiring employees and providing goods or services at low or no cost are also industries. - Third Category: Institutions where the workforce is motivated by the mission rather than wages, such as Ashrams, are not industries. The court emphasized that the nature of employer-employee relations is crucial in determining whether an institution is an industry. Research Institutes: Research institutes were considered industries as they involve systematic activity, employer-employee cooperation, and the production of valuable discoveries and solutions. The court overruled the Safdarjung case, which had excluded research institutes from the definition of industry. Educational Institutions: The court held that educational institutions are industries as they provide a significant service to the community. The University of Delhi case, which excluded educational institutions from the definition of industry, was overruled. The court emphasized that the nature of the activity, not the number of employees, determines whether an institution is an industry. Liberal Professions: The court rejected the exclusion of liberal professions such as lawyers, doctors, and engineers from the definition of industry. The Solicitors' case, which had excluded these professions, was overruled. The court noted that the cooperation between the professional and their employees in providing services qualifies these professions as industries. Clubs: Clubs were generally considered industries as they involve systematic activity, employer-employee cooperation, and the provision of goods and services to members and guests. The Gymkhana and Cricket Club of India cases, which had excluded clubs from the definition of industry, were overruled. Governmental Functions: The court distinguished between sovereign functions and other governmental activities. Only sovereign functions, such as legislative power, administration of law, and judicial power, are excluded from the definition of industry. Welfare activities and economic ventures undertaken by the government are considered industries. Conclusion: The court provided a comprehensive interpretation of the definition of "industry" under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It emphasized the nature of the activity and the employer-employee relationship as the primary criteria for determining whether an entity is an industry. The court overruled several previous decisions that had excluded various entities from the definition of industry and called for legislative intervention to provide clarity on the issue.
|