Kailasam, J.

This writ appeal is preferred by the Madras State Electricity Board represented by its Secretary against the decision of Rajagopalan, J., holding that the clerical staff of the Board, which is an industrial undertaking, is a commercial establishment as defined by the Madras Establishment Act. The appellant, the Madras State Electricity Board, was constituted under the Electricity (Supply) Act (Act 54 of 1948). The Madras Electricity Board was constituted with effect from 1 July, 1957. On its constitution the Board took over the employees, who were up to then in the employment of the Government of Madras in the Electricity Department. Many of them were clerks and typists appointed by the Government on a temporary basis. According to the rules, their services were liable to be terminated without notice. After the clerks and typists came under the Electricity Board, the Board recruited its own clerical staff and many of the clerks and typists, who were recruited on a temporary basis by the Government, were ousted on giving a month's notice. The discharged clerks and typists appealed to the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation under S.41 of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act. The Electricity Board applied to the Commissioner of Labour for determination of the question whether the employees were governed by the provisions of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act. In these proceedings the contention of the Electricity Board was that the provisions of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act were not applicable to these employees. The Commissioner of Labour by his order dated 23 December, 1959 held that the provisions of the Madras Shops and Establishment Act applied to the discharged clerical employees.

Against the said order a writ petition was preferred and the writ petition was dismissed by Rajagopalan, J., and this appeal is preferred by the Electricity Board against that judgment.The questions that arise for consideration in this appeal are whether the Madras State Electricity Board is a commercial establishment as defined in the Madras Shops and Establishments Act and whether the Electricity Board is exempted from the operation of the Act by S.4 of the Act. The Madras Shops and Establishments Act (Act 36 of 1947) was enacted for the purpose of regulating the conditions of work in shops, commercial establishments, etc. The Act regulated among others the hours of work, spread-over periods of work, holidays, employment of children and young persons, healthy and safety, leave, wages, etc. The word "establishment" is defined as meaning a shop, commercial establishment, restaurant, etc. The definition of "commercial establishment" so far as it is relevant to this case is an establishment which is a clerical department of industrial undertaking. The term "person employed" is defined under S.2(12) of the Act, as, in the case of a factory or an industrial undertaking, a member of the clerical staff employed in such factory or undertaking. The preamble to the Electricity (Supply) Act provides that the Act is for the rationalization of the production and supply of electricity and for taking measures conducive the electrical development. As the purpose of the Act is production and distribution of electricity, it cannot seriously be contended that the Board is not an industrial undertaking. In State of Bombay v. Hospital Mazdoor Sabha the Supreme Court in dealing with the Industrial Disputes Act observed that there would be no difficulty in holding that the State is carrying on an undertaking when it runs a group of hospitals. Their lordships observed that there could be no doubt that if a hospital was run by private citizens for profit, it would be an undertaking, that the presence of profit motive was not essential and that if a private citizen runs a hospital without charging any fees from the patients treated it would nevertheless be an undertaking. In their lordships' opinion the character of the activi