The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the definitions of 'worker' and 'factory' under the Factories Act, including the application of the presumption under S.103 and the scope of 'premises' in the definition of 'factory'.

1. This is an appeal filed by the State against the judgment of the Industrial Tribunal and Special First Class Magistrate, Ernakulam acquitting the respondents who were charged for contravention of R.4 of the Kerala Factories Rules, 1957 prescribed under S.6 (1) (b) of the Factories Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. The two accused in the case are partners of the Suhara Rice and Oil Mill situated at Inchamudi in Trichur District. On 23 31962 pw.1 the Additional Inspector of Factories, Trichur visited the mill and found that three workers were employed there. They had failed to submit to the Chief Inspector of Factories an application in Form No. 2 for the registration of the factory and for the grant of licence as required under the Act and the Rules. On notice being issued to the accused they stated that they were employing only two workmen and that the Act does not apply. After obtaining sanction from the Chief Inspector of Factories a complaint was filed against the two accused.

3. Admittedly this mill is an establishment where power is being used and if the accused employs three or more workmen the mill would come within the purview of the Factories Act. Under the original notification issued by the State Government on 8111957 under S.85 of the Factories Act the number of employees was fixed at 5 or more. But this notification was subsequently amended on 22-5-1959 and the number of persons to be employed was reduced to three. So if three or more persons are employed as workmen the accused would have to apply for registration and licence. The learned Special Magistrate on the evidence found that only two of the workmen had been employed in the manufacturing process and as the prosecution had not led any evidence regarding the nature of the work done by the third workman Chathu who was seen working by the Inspector in the yard it cannot be presumed that he was doing some work connected with or incidental, with the manufacturing process and acquitted the accused, holding that it is not a factory requiring registration and licence. The conclusions reached by the learned Special Magistrate are challenged in this appeal.

4. The first question that arises in this case is whether Chathu seen working in the yard of the factory could be taken as 'a worker' within the meaning of the term. In the Act worker is defined in S.2 (1) as follows:

"'worker' means a person employed, directly or through any agency, whether for wages or not, in any manufacturing process, or in cleaning any part of the machinery or premises used for a manufacturing process or in any other kind of work incidental to or, connected with the manufacturing process, or the subject of the manufacturing process."

The evidence of pw.1 shows that Chathu was working in the yard, but as stated by the learned Magistrate there is no specific evidence adduced as to the nature of the work that he was doing and whether it was incidental or connected with the manufacturing process. That is a matter which will depend on the evidence. But the learned Special Magistrate has omitted to notice the significance of S.103 of the Factories Act. That section deals with the presumption as to employment of a person found in the factory. That section reads:

" If a person is found in a factory at any time, except during intervals for meals or rest, when work is going on or the machinery is in motion, he shall until the contrary is proved, be deemed for the purposes of this Act and the rules made thereunder to have been at that time employed in the factory."

So prima facie any person found working in the factory can be taken as a person employed in the factory.

5. The further question that arises for decision is whether the yard in which the third worker Chathu was doing work could be considered to be 'a factory' within the meaning of the term factory. Factory is defined in S.2 (m). It reads:

" "Factory" means any premises including the precincts thereof

(i) whereon ten or more wo