Vijaykanth and Amar Jha were in the employment as driver in a university. The university later found that operating the bus services for the students has resulted in loss and decided to discontinue the facility. This has
CS Professional · Labour Laws & Practice · PYQS · June 2025
Vijaykanth and Amar Jha were in the employment as driver in a university. The university later found that operating the bus services for the students has resulted in loss and decided to discontinue the facility. This has resulted in the termination of services of the drivers by way of retrenchment. These two drivers were served with a notice of retrenchment on payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice. The aggrieved drivers filed petitions before the Industrial Tribunal for claiming compensation. The petitions by the respective drivers were contested by the Appellants - the University on the ground that the university was not the employer under section 2(g) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and secondly on the ground that the work carried on by the university was not industry and so the petitions are liable to be rejected. The tribunal rejected the objections and directed the appellants (University) to pay the petitioners the retrenchment compensation. In the light of the above mentioned facts, decide the following questions: (i) Whether the activities carried on by the University is of an Industry ? Explain.
Answer & Explanation:
Answer 5(b)(i) Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defines the term 'Industry' which means any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling of employers and includes any calling service, employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen. The activities carried on by the university is an industry as per Supreme Court decision in Corporation of City of Nagpur Vs its Employees, but was over ruled in Delhi University Vs Ramnath where Supreme Court held that education is mission and vocation rather than a profession or trade or business. The predominant activities of the university is outside the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 because teaching and teachers connected with it do not come within its purview and the minor activities carried on by the subordinate staff which may fall within the purview of the Act cannot be after the predominant character of the institution. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and the orders of Industrial Tribunal were set aside and petition of the drivers were dismissed. The Supreme Court carried out an in-depth study of the definition of the term 'industry' in a comprehensive manner in the case of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A Rajiappa, AIR 1978 SC 548, after considering various previous judicial decisions on the subject and in the process, it rejected some of them, while evolving a new concept of the term "industry". After discussing the definition from various angles, in the above case, the Supreme Court, laid down the tests to determine whether an activity is covered by the definition of "industry" or not. It is also referred to as the triple test. The Supreme Court observed that professions, clubs, educational institutions, co-operatives, research institutes, charitable projects and other kindred adventures, if they fulfil the triple tests listed, cannot be exempted from the scope of Section 2(j). As regards institutions, if the triple tests of systematic activity, cooperation between employer and employee and production of goods and services were to be applied, a university, a college, a research institute or teaching institution will be "industry". The decision of Supreme Court in Delhi University case was examined in length and was over ruled in Bangalore water supply and Sewerage Board Vs A. Rajappa by the Supreme Court (AIR 1978 SC 548). It was held that university is Industry and employees (Administrative and Support Staff other than teachers) are workmen.
Topics: Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Related Questions in this Topic
- Vijaykanth and Amar Jha were in the employment as driver in a university. The university later found that operating the ...
- Bharath, the Managing Director of a company unilaterally announced the target in the Production Section that 9000 units ...
- Kiran, the Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the workman), was appointed in 2011 as a helper in TVS Auto Ltd. (here...
- Kiran, the Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the workman), was appointed in 2011 as a helper in TVS Auto Ltd. (here...
- Kiran, the Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the workman), was appointed in 2011 as a helper in TVS Auto Ltd. (here...