The activities of a municipality, including those of the municipal secretary, clerks, lamp-lighter, road mazdoor, sanitary mukadam, rat destroyer, sweeper, scavenger, maid-servant, and nurse, are industrial activities within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

Headnote:
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT - INDUSTRY - SECTION 2(J) - DEFINITION OF INDUSTRY - ACTIVITIES OF MUNICIPALITY - WHETHER INDUSTRIAL - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 2(K) - WHETHER MUNICIPAL CHECKER AND NAKA CLERKS ARE WORKMEN ENGAGED IN INDUSTRY.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, Sirur Municipality, challenged the Award Part I made by the Industrial Tribunal of Bombay, which held that the activities of the municipality, except for the municipal checker and Naka clerks, were industrial activities and that the dispute between the municipality and its employees was an industrial dispute. The petitioner contended that none of the activities of the municipality, except those in which the municipal fitter, assistant fitter, and oilman were engaged, were industries within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, and that the dispute was not an industrial dispute.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the activities of the municipality, including those of the municipal secretary, clerks, lamp-lighter, road mazdoor, sanitary mukadam, rat destroyer, sweeper, scavenger, maid-servant, and nurse, were industrial activities within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The court also held that the municipal checker and Naka clerks, who were engaged in the collection of Octroi, were not engaged in an industrial activity, but they came within the expression "any person" used in Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which defines an industrial dispute, and therefore, the dispute raised with regard to the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour of the municipal checker and the Naka clerks by the other employees, who were workmen of the Municipality, was an industrial dispute within the meaning of Section 2(k).
Issues: 1. Whether the activities of the municipality, except for the municipal checker and Naka clerks, were industrial activities within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act? 2. Whether the dispute between the municipality and its employees was an industrial dispute? 3. Whether the municipal checker and Naka clerks were workmen engaged in industry?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the activities of the municipality, including those of the municipal secretary, clerks, lamp-lighter, road mazdoor, sanitary mukadam, rat destroyer, sweeper, scavenger, maid-servant, and nurse, were industrial activities within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act because they were systematically or habitually undertaken for the production or distribution of goods or for the rendering of material services to the community as at large or a part of such community with the help of employees, and their object was the satisfaction of material human needs. 2. The court held that the dispute between the municipality and its employees was an industrial dispute because it related to the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour of the employees, and the activities of the municipality were industrial activities. 3. The court held that the municipal checker and Naka clerks, who were engaged in the collection of Octroi, were not engaged in an industrial activity, but they came within the expression "any person" used in Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which defines an industrial dispute, and therefore, the dispute raised with regard to the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour of the municipal checker and the Naka clerks by the other employees, who were workmen of the Municipality, was an industrial dispute within the meaning of Section 2(k).
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition and upheld the Award Part I made by the Industrial Tribunal of Bombay.

JUDGMENT - 1. This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Award Part I made by the opponent No. 2, as the Industrial Tribunal of Bombay, in the dispute which was referred to him under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, between the petitioner, who is the Sirur Municipality (A District Municipality functioning under the Bombay District Municipal Act, 1901), and opponent No. 1, who are its employees represented by the Poona Mazdoor Sabha. The Award was submitted by the opponent No. 2 to the Government on 20th April 1959 and was published in the Bombay Government Gazette, Part I-L, on 21st May 1959.

2. The dispute related to the pay-scales, allowance, leave, etc. of the employees of the petitioner and the categories of employees mentioned in the order of reference were as follows :

(i) Municipal Secretary.

(ii) All Clerks except Naka Clerk.

(iii) Municipal Fitter.

(iv) Assistant Fitter, Lamp Lighter.

(v) Municipal Checker.

(vi) Naka Clerk, Sanitary Mukaclam.

(vii) Peon, Road Mazdoor, Oilman and Rat Destroyer.

(viii) Sweepers and Scavengers.

(ix) Maid Servant.

(x) Nurse.

Before the Tribunal a preliminary objection was raised by the petitioner as to the maintainability of the reference. It was contended that the categories of employees mentioned in the application were not engaged in activities which fell within the definition of "Industry" contained in the Industrial Disputes Act, that the Industrial Disputes Act was not applicable to the dispute, that the Reference was not valid and that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the Reference. The Part I Award, which is the subject-matter of the present application, is the decision of opponent No. 2 on this preliminary objection raised by the petitioner. The opponent No. 2 has held that the demands of all the categories of employees enumerated in the Reference can be dealt with by him and he has, therefore, directed that the matter should be set down for hearing on merits.

3. Although in the objection taken by the petitioner it was contended that none of the categories of the employees was engaged in an activity, which was an industry within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, the petitioner admitted before the Tribunal, that the Municipal fitter, the Assistant Fitter and the oilmen would comewithin the operation of the Industrial Disputes Act. The preliminary objection, however, was pressed with regard to the rest of the categories of employees mentioned in the Reference.

4. Following the decision of the Supreme Court in D. N. Banerji v. P. R. Mukherjee, 1953 S. C. R. 802 and the decisions of this Court in Hospital Mazdoor Sabha v. State of Bombay, 58 Bom. LR 769 and Corporation of the City of Nagpur v. N. H. Mujumdar, 60 Bom. LR 180, the opponent No. 2 came to the conclusion that the dispute between the Municipality and its employees engaged in activities of the municipality, which fell within the definiton of "Industry" contained in the Act, would he an industrial dispute, which could be referred to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10(1)(d) of the Act and whieh the Industrial Tribunal would have jurisdiction to entertain and deal with. He also took the view that in order to determine whether a particular activity of the Municipality was an "Industry" within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, the test to be applied was whether, if that activity had been undertaken by a private agency, it would have been an "industry" to which the Act applied. On these principles he examined the various activities of the petitioner-Municipality and came to the conclusion that all the categories of the employees which were mentioned in the Reference with the exception of the municipal checker and the Naka clerks who were engaged in the collection of Octroi, were employees engaged in activities which fell within the definition of "industry" in the Industrial Disputes Act. He further held that although the municipal c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis