9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Determining whether Sangu Soap Works qualifies as a factory under Act 63 of 1948 based on the number of workers and the manufacturing process being carried out. Analysis: The judgment involves two connected revisions stemming from convictions by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tanjore. The central issue is whether Sangu Soap Works can be classified as a factory under the Factories Act. The definition of a factory under Section 2(m)(ii) of the Act hinges on the presence of twenty or more workers engaged in a manufacturing process without the aid of power. The interpretation of the term "manufacturing process" is crucial, with the current definition being more comprehensive and inclusive compared to the previous legislation. The judgment references precedents to elaborate on what constitutes a manufacturing process. It emphasizes that the entire premises can be deemed a factory even if manufacturing occurs only in a part of the premises. Various activities related to production, such as converting raw materials into finished products or packaging goods, are considered integral to the manufacturing process. The court emphasizes that a genuine transformation must occur for an activity to be classified as manufacturing, requiring a tangible change in the article produced. The judgment delves into the definition of a "worker" under the Act, categorizing individuals directly or indirectly involved in manufacturing processes, cleaning machinery, or performing tasks related to production. The court scrutinizes the roles of specific individuals at Sangu Soap Works to ascertain whether they qualify as workers contributing to the requisite count of twenty employees. The inclusion of individuals like Subbiah Asari, engaged in packaging soaps, is deemed justifiable within the definition of a worker, while the role of Alagirisami, holding a paint tin for signboard painting, is deemed insufficient to meet the worker criteria. Ultimately, the court concludes that Sangu Soap Works does not meet the criteria to be classified as a factory under the Act due to the insufficient count of workers involved in manufacturing processes. The convictions based on this premise are overturned, and any fines collected are ordered to be refunded. The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to the statutory definitions and criteria outlined in the Factories Act to determine the classification of industrial establishments accurately.
|
