ORDER :- The question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is, as to whether the view of the Industrial Tribunal, expressed in Ex. P-1, that the Maramath Department of the Travancore Devaswom Board is an Industry under Section 2 (j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Central Act 14 of 1947, is correct or not. The expression industry is defined under Section 2 (j) as :

" industry means any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling of employers and includes any calling, service, employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen".

In view of certain disputes that arose between the Travancore Devaswom Board and the workmen of the said Board in the Davaswom Maramath Work establishment, the State Government referred that dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Trivandrum. The various matters referred for adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal have been mentioned in the award, Ex. P-1. They related to wage revision, dearness allowance, contributory Provident Fund, leave and holiday facilities, permanency of the workers, preference to Maramat workers in the regular establishment when vacancies arise, Cycle allowance to work establishment maistries, and change of designation of maistries.

2. The petitioner, Travancore Devaswom Board, apart from raising various contentions on merits, regarding the claims of the workers in respect of the several matters referred for adjudication, took a preliminary objection to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the matter, on the ground that the dispute referred for adjudication is not an "industrial dispute" because the Maramat Department of the Devaswom Board is not an industry under Section 2 (j) of the Act. On a former occasion the Industrial Tribunal concerned overruled the objections raised by the Devaswom Board regarding the dispute not being an industrial dispute and held that the Maramat section of the Devaswom Board is an industry under Section 2 (j). The Industrial Tribunal also recorded findings on the various matters referred to it for adjudication. That was by its award dated 11-9-1959.

3. That award was challenged by the present petitioner, in this Court in O. P. No. 1277 of 1959. The main contention that appears to have been taken in the said O. P. was that the Maramat Work Establishment concerned is not an industry under Section 2 (j) of the Act. It appears to have been also urged before this Court that the evidence on record, and the findings of the Tribunal, are insufficient to come to a definite conclusion as to whether the Maramat section of the Board is an industry as defined in the Act or not.

4. Mr. Justice M. S. Menon, as he then was, and Mr. Justice T. K. Joseph, by order dated 18th November, 1960, accepted the contention of the parties to the effect that the evidence on record was not sufficient for a proper adjudication of the question. In this view, the learned Judges quashed the award and directed the Industrial Tribunal to deal with the matter afresh, after allowing both the parties to adduce such evidence as they consider fit in support of their contentions.

5. The learned Judges, in particular stated, that the type of evidence and finding that they have in mind are those which were available to the Supreme Court in their decision reported in Nagpur Corporation v. Its Employees, AIR 1960 SC 675. The learned Judges did not express any opinion regarding the adjudication made by the Tribunal on the various other matters referred to it for adjudication.

6. In consequence of the directions given by the learned Judges in O. P. No. 1277 of 1959 the matter was again taken up by the Industrial Tribunal. It will be seen that though both parties were given liberty to let in evidence, the Union alone appears to have placed some additional evidence by further examining the Secretary of the Union, who, no doubt, had been already examined as WW. 2.

7. In the award, Ex. P-1, which is under attack in these proceedings, the In

Click Here to Read the rest of this document