'Industry' Definition Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court 9-Judge Bench [Day 2]
The Supreme Court constitution bench will continue its hearing on the correctness of the definition of “industry” given by then Justice VR Krishna Iyer in the 1978 decision in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa.
This is the second day of the hearing.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice BV Nagarathna, Justice PS Narasimha, Justice Dipankar Datta, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vipul Pancholi is hearing the matter.
Follow this page for the live updates. Report of first day's hearing can be read here.
Gupta: if you look at the index, the first is disputes but then what we have is strikes and lockouts, layoffs and retrechments-this is way, as farasat said, this is a problem looking for a solution
Gupta: i submit this paradigm has to be shift, nobody has looked into the statute. the industry is defined for the purpose of ID Act. it goes into various chapters and if you see that not all activities are carried out for production using E-E
Gupta: lawyer may have a cleaner working for him and the contribution of her is minimal so it may not be industry- the broad definition is cut down like this
Gupta: the approach of bangalore is not appropriate approach for purpose of all activities. the paradigm created by J Iyer is anything which is structured by combination of E-E and which produces something that satisfy human needs is the broad principle he proceeds
Gupta: we are interested in the phrase industry for ID Act but the way you define it has repercussion in many other legislations which relates to industry.
what bangalore does is it lays down the general principles to be followed and I am only concerned about charitable organisations
Gupta: the question is therefore what is the scope of 2j? four issues mylords framed, i am only interested in addressing the first.
J Nagarathna: I authored in Karnataka where I said the temple is not an establishment under the shops and establishment act
Gupta: full bench of madras HC has referred to other HCs where it has been held that temple is industry. For instance, in Jaganath temple has been held as industry by the Orissa HC
Gupta: if its an industry, its an establishment within the shops and establishment and therefore, the payment of gratituty act will apply and corresponding provisions put in place by state will not apply
Sr Adv Jaideep Gupta(commissioner of hindu religous and charitable establishment, TM): short point which arises in this appeal, and not all are before the court, the only point is what is the scope of 2j. what the seven judge said that temples are industry within the ID Act