Advocates:
A.K.JAIN, A.K.SEN GUPTA, ANAND PARKASH, C.K.SRIVASTAVA, K.R.NAGARAJA, M.C.BHANDARE, M.K.RAMAMURTHY, P.H.Parekh, P.P.Rao, S.K.MEHTA, SMANDA BHANDARE

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding whether the Indian Standards Institution constitutes an "industry" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947:

• The Legal Definition of Industry: The term "industry" under Section 2(j) is defined as any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture, or calling of employers, and includes any calling, service, employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation of workmen. While the definition has two parts, it must be read as a whole to denote a collective enterprise where employers and employees are associated (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• The "Analogy to Trade or Business" Test: For an undertaking to be an industry, it must be analogous to trade or business. This requires the activity to be organized in a manner similar to trade or business, not be casual, and involve cooperation between employers and employees to produce material goods or render material services (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• Irrelevance of Profit Motive: It is not necessary for an undertaking to have a profit motive or to involve investment of capital to be considered an industry. The absence of these features does not disqualify an activity from being an industry (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• Public Interest vs. Commercial Character: The fact that an activity serves the public interest or is subsidized by the government does not automatically exclude it from the definition of industry. Many industries are designed to subserve public interest (!) . However, the enterprise must still be economic in nature, producing material goods or services (!) .
• Material Services: Material services are those rendered through cooperation between employers and employees to provide the community with something like electric power, water, or transportation. They are distinguished from professional services (like doctors or lawyers) which benefit individuals based on their specific needs rather than being produced as a commodity (!) (!) .
• Facts of the Case: The Indian Standards Institution (ISI) is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, established by a Government of India resolution to prepare and promote standards for products and processes (!) (!) .
• ISI's Activities: The Institution engages in systematic activities including:
  • Preparing and publishing Indian standards (technical documents for quality and safety) (!) (!) .
  • Issuing licenses for the use of the "Standard Mark" (ISI Certification Mark) to ensure products meet standards (!) (!) .
  • Maintaining laboratories for testing articles and processes (!) .
  • Maintaining libraries and disseminating technical information through publications like the ISI Bulletin (!) (!) .
• Financial Operations: The Institution derives significant income from the sale of standards, commission from overseas standards, and fees for certification marks and testing services. In 1973-74, income from sales was approximately Rs. 16.24 million, and from certification marking, it was Rs. 5.2 million (!) (!) .
• Majority Opinion (Allowing Appeal): The majority held that the Institution's activities are carried on systematically, are organized like a trade or business, and render material services to manufacturers, distributors, and consumers. The income generated and the commercial nature of the certification scheme indicate an economic activity analogous to trade or business, thus constituting an "industry" (!) (!) .
• Dissenting Opinion (Dismissing Appeal): The dissenting judge argued that the Institution is a public service institution set up by the government to discharge duties in the public interest. He contended that since it is run without a profit motive, does not distribute profits, and its activities are essentially a manifestation of governmental duty, it does not bear the character of a business or trade and therefore is not an industry (!) (!) .
• Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the Industrial Tribunal was directed to proceed with the reference on the basis that the activities of the Indian Standards Institution constitute an "industry" within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Act (!) .