JUDGMENT

Nanavati, J.-Leave granted.

2. The question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether Physical Research Laboratory (for short PRL ), the appellant, is an industry within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

3. The facts and circumstances which gave rise to this question are as follows. The respondent was appointed by PRL as Scientific Glass Blower on 25.10.48. He continued to work as such till 11.5.76 when he was transferred to Photography Documentation Services on a post which was non-technical and administrative. On 31.12.78 he attained the age of 58 years. He was, therefore, retired from service with effect from 1.1.79. Feeling aggrieved by his retirement at the age of 58 years and not at 60 he filed a writ petition in the High Court of Gujarat but it was withdrawn. He then filed a complaint before the Labour Commissioner who, on the basis thereof, made a reference to the Labour Court at Ahmedabad.

4. The Labour Court rejected the contention of the appellant that it was not an industry within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the I.D. Act. Though it recorded a finding that PRL is purely a research institute and the research work carrie