SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1953 Supreme(Mad) 213

RAMASWAMI GOUNDER


Advocates:
Alagiriswami for S. Ramachandra Iyer for Petitioner.
R. Santanam for the Public Prosecutor (V.T. Rangaswami Aiyangar) on behalf of the State

Order.-

The only point for decision in this case is whether the persons who were found by the Inspector of Factories employed in the cigar factory can be considered to be workers. It is stated that these workers were employed on a contract basis and therefore cannot be held to be workers.

This would not take them out of the definition of a worker under section 2(h) of the Factories Act, which means a person employed, 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 whatsoever incidental to or connected with the manufacturing process but does not include any person solely employed in a clerical capacity in any room or place where no manufacturing process is being carried on. (Cf. definition of Workmen’s Compensation Act VIII of 1923, section 2, clause (n).) And a factory is defined under clause (j) of section 2 as follows:-

“Any premises including the precincts there wherein twenty or more workers are working or were working on any day of the preceding 12 months and in any part of which a manufacturing process is being carried on with the aid of power or is ordinari





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top