JUDGMENT

A.K. MATHUR, J.- Both these appeals raise common question of law, therefore they are being disposed of by this common order.

Civil Appeal No, 37 of 1998

2. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court dated 14-2-1997 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court held that Tata Main Hospital at Jamshedpur (hereinafter referred to as "the Hospital") is an establishment within the meaning of Section 2(6) of the Bihar Shops and Establishments Act, 1953 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act") and it is covered by the aforesaid Act. Aggrieved by the 9 aforesaid order, this appeal has been tiled by the appellant.

3. Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that the Hospital was established by the management of Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. in the year 1908 for providing medical facilities to the employees as well as their families and dependants of the Company, and its associated companies, namely, TELCO, Tata Yodogawa, Tata Robins Frazer and their employees at Jamshedpur. It is also alleged that apart from catering to employees of the appellant and its associated industries, it also caters to government employees, on payment of charges of about Rs 50 per day and from other private patients at the rate of Rs 120 per day. It is alleged that 75% of the patients treated are either employees of the appellant or its associated companies or family members of the employees of the appellant or its associated companies. 15% of the patients are government employees and the rest 10% of the patients are outsiders. It is alleged that a letter was sent by the Labour Superintendent, Jamshedpur to the appellant on 7-11-1995 for registration of the Hospital as an establishment under the provisions of the Act. An objection was taken by the appellant to the effect that since it is providing medical service to its employees and its associated industries and it is not involved in commercial activities, as such it is not an establishment within the meaning of the Act and it cannot be covered by the aforesaid Act. This objection was overruled by the authorities. Hence the present writ petition was filed.

4. The Division Bench of the Patna High Court after considering necessary provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder affirmed the order of the authority and held that the establishment is covered by the Act. Hence, the present appeal by way of special leave before this Court.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Principally two submissions have been made: (i) that the present Hospital does not fall within the definition of "establishment" as defined in Section 2(6) of the Act, and (ii) that under Section 4(2) read with Schedule I Item 2 it is a charitable hospital and therefore it is exempted under the aforesaid section.

6. Before we advert to the facts of the case, we may mention here that a statement of revenue and expenditure of the budget of the Medical Division has been furnished by the appellant and it has been pointed out that there is always deficit in the medical account under the Hospital head. It is also admitted position that the Hospital is one of the divisions of the appellant. It has also given the details as to the number of patients of the appellant and its associated companies taken care of; a number of government servants and private patients are also being treated by the Hospital.

7. Intervenors have also filed a statement showing what are the charges effective from 1-4-2000 for non-entitled category of patients and it has been pointed out that admission charge of Rs 75 has been revised to Rs 1000, charges in the general ward are Rs 400 per bed, VIP cabin is charged at Rs 1250 and ICU cabin charge is Rs 2250 per day. Likewise, the details for each of the medical speciality charges are being levied varying from Rs 100 to Rs 1000. It is an admitted position that the Hospital is a part of the establishment of the appellant and