1971 Supreme(SC) 593

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.A. VAIDIALINGAM AND P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, JJ.
The Management of the Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Appellant
Versus
Their Workman, R. K. Mittal, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 244 of 1967, D/- 15-11-1971.
Advocates appeared
Mr. G. B. Pai, Sr. Advocate, (Mr. P. B. Tiwarim, Advocate of M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Col. With him), for Appellant; Mr. M. K. Ramamurthi, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. J. Ramamurthi and Madan Mohan, Advocates, with him), for Respondent.

Headnote:

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2(j),2(k),10(1) - Payment of Bonus Act - Section 32(5) - Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act - Section 4 - Challenge - Termination from services -Consignments - Charge Sheet - Employee of Appellant with full back wages and continuity of service is challenged, In February Congress of International Chamber of Commerce was in Delhi for which purpose a Committee known as Indian National Committee of International Chamber of Commerce was brought into existence and services of Respondent along with other workmen were loaned to it by Federation - Respondent worked for about days but was only paid overtime for about days and consequently for about days and consequently he claimed overtime for remainder of days as according to him other workmen had also bee paid similarly - This claim was not admitted by Federation with result that Respondent caused a Lawyer s notice to be issued to Federation to Indian National Committee of International Chamber of Commerce and to International Chamber of Commerce with its Head Office at Paris demanding payment of his dues amounting to about When no replies were received he caused another notice to be served retaining to file a suit whereupon International Chamber of Commerce sent a telegram to Federation enquiring whether it should deal with matter or whether they would deal with it - To this Federation replied that it will deal with it but it appears that claim of Respondent was not settled - Respondent then filed a suit for payment of arrears - workmen s grievance was unjustified and ins spite of his being informed that no discrimination has been practised he with a view to harass management and compel it by unfair means to pay him more than what was legitimately due to him started making complaints simultaneously to Federation and International Chamber of Commerce which did not employ him and with full knowledge that whatever grievance he legitimately had had to be resolved only by a reference to Federation which was his employer - It was averred that enquiry conducted was fully in accordance with principles of natural justice and requirements of law that findings of Enquiry Officer were fair reasonable and fully supported by records of Enquiry and that these definitely established guilt of Respondent - In any case Federation was not an industry - Whether it should deal with matter or whether they would deal with it - Whether termination of services of illegal and unjustified and if so what directions are necessary in this respect - Whether those were employees of the Federation or otherwise - whether promotion of trade commerce or industry which is considered to be a charitable object can be termed as a business or trade resulting in production of material services within meaning of an industry under Section 2 (j) of Act - Whether its activities are industrial and undertaking an industry within meaning of Section 2 (j) - Whether these decisions are relevant for deciding question whether a dispute referred to is an industrial dispute under Act will be dealt with presently - Whether group of hospitals run undoubtedly for purpose of giving medical relief to citizens and for helping to impart medical education are an undertaking or not it would be pertinent to enquire whether an activity of a like nature would be an undertaking if it is carried on by a private citizen or a group of private citizen - Whether group of hospitals run undoubtedly for purpose of giving medical relief to citizens and for helping to impart medical education are an undertaking or not it would be pertinent to enquire whether an activity of a like nature would be an undertaking if it is carried on by a private citizen or a group of private citizens - Whether a hospital can be considered to fall within concept of industry in Industrial Disputes Act and whether all Hospitals of whatever description can be covered by concept of only some Hospitals under special conditions - Held, Court view facts justifiably lead to conclusion that Institution deliberately diversified its objects from only tending to sick infirm or unwanted cattle by adopting policy of keeping cattle not merely for their own sake but for sake of improving cattle population committe to its care with an eye to serve human beings by making large quantities of good milk available to them and thereby getting an income which would augment its resources - It pursued its policy just as any dairy owner would by having a few good quality bulls to impregnate cows and thereby ensuring a steady production of milk and also improve quality of progeny - That it was an industry having regard to various activities which it carried out particularly having regard to fact that value of milk supplied to sick and infirm cattle was infinitesimal compared to that sold in market expenses incurred in connection with treatment of sick and infirm animals was also negligible compared to total expenses of institution - Number of men employed for such treatment was very small at all times - Mere fact therefore that Pinjrapole never purchased milch cows and never purchased stud bulls except for one made no difference to question as to whether their activity of maintaining cows and bulls could only be considered as an investment - Court do not think any such inference would arise nor can this provision be of help in construction of Section 2 (j) of Act - There is in our view force in contention of Advocate for Respondent that exclusion of certain undertakings was a legislative policy either because they would have been included otherwise by application of that Act to them or by way of abundant caution - There is therefore no warrant to allow any other element to be added to criteria laid down for determining what an industry is - In Court view linch-pin of definition of industry is to ascertain systematic activity which organisation is discharging namely whether it partakes nature of a business or trade or is an undertaking or manufacture or calling of employees - If it is that and there is co-operation of employer and employee resulting in production of material services it is an industry notwithstanding that its objects are charitable or that it does not make profit or even where profits are made they are not distributed among members - Court find little substance in contention of Federation that Respondent had issued legal notices to International Chamber of Commerce with a view to bring discredit to Federation - Its employer - Charge of misconduct that was framed against Respondent was that he having acted in a manner inconsistent with his duties and obligation as an employee of Federation he caused to be addressed without any justification copies of letters to International Chamber of Commerce with a view to bring and/or capable of bringing disrepute to Federation in eyes of International Chamber of Commerce - Enquiry Officer in domestic enquiry that having regard to emphatic assertion of Respondent that he had no intention to bring disrepute to Federation in any way and that he was only trying to get his legitimate dues it is not necessary to analyse exact intention but effect has been to convey to International Chamber of Commerce a low impression about Federation and thereby to bring down prestige of Federation in eyes of International Chamber of Commerce - In spite of this finding enquiry Officer found that Respondents action was clearly subversive of discipline and in his opinion deserved to be so treated - Tribunal as Court have noticed earlier found that this did not amount to misconduct which finding in Court view is justified on evidence - Appeal dismissed