9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether hospitals can be regarded as industries within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. Merits of individual cases regarding claims of employees. Detailed Analysis: 1. Whether hospitals can be regarded as industries within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act: The judgment addresses whether hospitals, specifically Safdarjung Hospital, Tuberculosis Hospital, and Kurji Holy Family Hospital, qualify as industries under the Industrial Disputes Act. The court examined the definitions and precedents to determine if hospitals fit within the statutory concept of an industry. The Industrial Disputes Act defines 'industry' as any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture, or calling of employers and includes any calling, service, employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen. The court emphasized that the definition should be considered as a whole, indicating a collective enterprise involving both employers and employees. It clarified that an industry must involve cooperation between employers and employees in the production of material goods or services, which are commercially valuable. The court referred to the precedent set in the Hospital Mazdoor Sabha case, which held that hospitals, even if run by the government or charitable organizations, could be considered industries. However, the court found this view extreme and not justified, emphasizing that merely satisfying human needs does not make an activity an industry unless it involves an economic activity analogous to trade or business. The court also considered the amendment to the Industrial Disputes Act, which included 'service in hospitals and dispensaries' in the list of public utility services. It clarified that this inclusion does not automatically convert all hospitals into industries. The primary condition remains that the entity must first qualify as an industry. 2. Merits of Individual Cases: C.A. No. 1705 of 1969 (Safdarjung Hospital): The court found that Safdarjung Hospital is not engaged in an economic activity analogous to trade or business. It is run as a government department providing medical treatment, and there is no evidence to suggest it operates as a commercial enterprise. Consequently, it cannot be considered an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act. Regarding the merits of the case, Kuldip Singh Sethi, a Lower Division Clerk, claimed a higher pay scale of store-keepers. The court noted that Sethi had initially chosen the position of Lower Division Clerk and had his security deposit for the store-keeper job refunded. His claim for the higher pay scale arose only after the scale was revised. The court found that Sethi did not meet the qualifications for the revised pay scale and had pending matters against him that precluded his promotion. Therefore, his claim was not sustainable, and the award of Rs. 914 in his favor was incorrect. The appeal was allowed, and the order was set aside with no order as to costs. C.A. No. 1781 of 1969 (Tuberculosis Hospital): The Tuberculosis Hospital is part of the Tuberculosis Association of India and operates as a charitable research institute. Its primary purpose is research and training, with treatment being a part of these activities. The court held that the hospital does not qualify as an industry since its dominant purpose is not economic activity but research and training. The order of the Additional Industrial Tribunal, Delhi, was reversed, and the reference to the Tribunal under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act was deemed incompetent. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs. C.A. No. 1777 of 1969 (Kurji Holy Family Hospital): The Kurji Holy Family Hospital operates with entirely charitable objectives, focusing on training, research, and treatment. Its income primarily comes from donations, and profit distribution is prohibited. The court concluded that the hospital is not an industry as defined in the Industrial Disputes Act. Consequently, the reference made by the State Government of Bihar was incompetent. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs, except in the first case (C.A. 1705 of 1967), where the earlier order of the court was to be given effect. Conclusion: The Supreme Court concluded that the hospitals in question do not qualify as industries under the Industrial Disputes Act. The individual claims of employees in the respective cases were not sustainable based on the merits and the legal framework governing industrial disputes. The appeals were allowed, and the orders in favor of the employees were set aside with no orders as to costs.
|
