pca
1444

The meaning of the word ‘industry’ does not pose any particular difficulty to ordinary people. But judges of the Supreme Court were struggling to interpret the term found in the Industrial Disputes Act for nearly four decades and the final word has not been spoken yet.

Last week, a seven-judge Constitution bench referred the question to a nine-judge bench in the case, State of Uttar Pradesh versus Jaibir Singh. The issue came to the fore in the 1978 judgment in the Bangalore Water Supply case, when the employees’ rights under the Act were denied by the state. The latter maintained that the water supply board was not an industry, as it was not making profit. Voluntary organisations and trusts also raised the same bar against their employees’ demands. A seven-judge bench delivered a split verdict. The later generation of judges has doubted the ruling, and therefore, the new seven-judge bench referred the question to a nine-judge constitution bench. It is a mark of the times that after the issue was referred to the constitution bench in 2005, it took over a decade to pass on the 38-year-old question to the nine judge bench.

Source:

Article view

From India, Malappuram
stephen_7
147

The Article view link is not working. Please look into. Thanks
From India, Chennai
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.





Contact Us Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2024 CiteHR ®

All Copyright And Trademarks in Posts Held By Respective Owners.