Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!

Scanned Judgements…!

Checking relevance for Tata Memorial Hospital Workers Union VS Tata Memorial Centre...

Checking relevance for General Manager, M/s Barsua Iron Ore Mines VS Vice President United Mines Mazdoor Union...

Checking relevance for Steel Authority Of India LTD. VS National Union Water Front Workers...

Steel Authority Of India LTD. VS National Union Water Front Workers - 2001 6 Supreme 602 : The Central Ground Water Board is not an industry carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government, and therefore does not fall within the definition of ''''industry'''' for the purposes of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The determination of whether an entity is an ''''industry'''' under the Act depends on whether it is carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government, not merely because it is an instrumentality or agency of the Government. Since the Central Ground Water Board is not such an industry, it is not subject to the Industrial Disputes Act.Checking relevance for Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Nagpur VS Model Mills Nagpur LTD. ...

Checking relevance for Delhi International Airport Limited VS Indira Gandhi Airport TDI Karamchari Union...

Checking relevance for Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Karnataka VS Workmen Represented By The General Secretary, Karnataka Provident Fund Employees Union...

Checking relevance for S College, Madras VS Management of S. I. E. T. WomenMohamed Ibrahim and Others...

S College, Madras VS Management of S. I. E. T. WomenMohamed Ibrahim and Others - 1989 0 Supreme(Mad) 483 : The Central Ground Water Board is not an ''''industry'''' within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as it is a department of the Central Government and falls under the category of ''''an authority established by or under a Central Act'''', which is not considered an ''''industry''''. The Supreme Court has held that educational institutions, though they may be ''''establishments'''', are not automatically ''''industries'''' under the Industrial Disputes Act unless they fall within the definition provided in Section 2(j), which includes ''''any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling of employers and includes any calling, service, employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen''''. However, the Central Ground Water Board, being a statutory body functioning under the Central Government, does not constitute an ''''industry'''' for the purposes of the Industrial Disputes Act. This is consistent with the legal principle that government departments and statutory bodies established by law are not treated as ''''industries'''' unless specifically included.Checking relevance for Jamila Khan VS State of H. P. ...

Checking relevance for Employees In Relation To Management Of Central Horticultural Experiment Station VS Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2...

Checking relevance for Management of Dock Labour Board, Visakhapatnam VS Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad...

Checking relevance for Research Director, Centeral Coffee Research Institute VS Labour Court, Kannur...

Checking relevance for Municipal Board, Jahangirabad, Bulandshahr VS State of U. P...

Checking relevance for CARLSBAD MINERAL WATER MFG. CO. LTD. VS P. K. SARKAR...

Checking relevance for Coir Board, Ernakulam, Cochin VS Indira Devi P. S...

Checking relevance for State Of U. P. VS Jai Bir Singh...

State Of U. P. VS Jai Bir Singh - 2005 4 Supreme 51 : The Central Ground Water Board, being a government department engaged in public welfare activities in discharge of constitutional obligations under Part IV of the Constitution (Directive Principles of State Policy), falls outside the purview of ''''industry'''' as defined under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. This is because such governmental activities, particularly those involving public welfare and sovereign functions, are not considered ''''industry'''' under the interpretation established in the Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board case, especially when they are not commercial or profit-oriented. The Supreme Court has held that activities undertaken by the State in the discharge of its constitutional obligations—such as public welfare initiatives—should be treated as sovereign functions and thus excluded from the definition of ''''industry''''.Checking relevance for National Union Of Commercial Employees, Bombay Incorporated Law Society, Intervener. VS M. B. Meher, Industrial Tribunal, Bombay...

Checking relevance for S. K. Verma VS Mahesh Chandra...

Checking relevance for Engineering Kamgar Union VS Electro Steels Castings LTD. ...

• Central Ground Water Board - Not an Industry ["Engineer-In-Chief Irrigation Dept. Lucknow VS Shiv Nath - Allahabad"], ["Haider Ali vs Central Ground Water Board Western Region, Ministry of Water Resources - National Green Tribunal"], ["STATE OF U. P. VS PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, U. P. AGRA - Allahabad"]

• The Supreme Court explicitly held in Jai Narain Singh’s case that the Central Ground Water Board is not an industry. The judgment notes: The Apex Court has merely noted that the Central Ground Water Board is not an Industry ["Engineer-In-Chief Irrigation Dept. Lucknow VS Shiv Nath - Allahabad"]. Similarly, other judgments confirm that the Board’s primary function is regulatory, not industrial, and it does not engage in activities classified as industry under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ["Haider Ali vs Central Ground Water Board Western Region, Ministry of Water Resources - National Green Tribunal"], ["STATE OF U. P. VS PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, U. P. AGRA - Allahabad"].

• Definition of Industry under Section 2(j) of the ID Act ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"], ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"], ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"]

• The landmark case Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa (1978) established that an entity qualifies as an industry if it involves systematic activity of production or distribution of goods or services for economic gain. The Court clarified that sovereign functions are generally excluded, but many public utilities, including water supply and sewerage boards, are considered industries unless they perform purely sovereign functions ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"], ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"].

• The Board’s activities are often deemed industrial, especially when they involve employment and systematic operations, as seen in cases involving water and sewerage boards ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"].

• Water Act and Pollution Control Authorities ["Assam Real Estate and Infrastructure Developers Association (AREIDA), represented by its President Sri P.K. Sharma vs State of Assam, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam - Gauhati"], ["SANJAY KUMAR PAL VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - National Green Tribunal"], ["SANJAY KUMAR PAL VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - National Green Tribunal"]

• The Water Act primarily regulates sewage and effluent discharge, including from non-industrial sources, emphasizing treatment before discharge ["Assam Real Estate and Infrastructure Developers Association (AREIDA), represented by its President Sri P.K. Sharma vs State of Assam, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam - Gauhati"]. The Board’s role involves ensuring compliance with standards to protect water quality, not functioning as an industrial entity ["Assam Real Estate and Infrastructure Developers Association (AREIDA), represented by its President Sri P.K. Sharma vs State of Assam, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam - Gauhati"].

• Industrial units must obtain consent under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and Air Act, and discharge standards are strictly enforced to prevent environmental harm ["SANJAY KUMAR PAL VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - National Green Tribunal"], ["SANJAY KUMAR PAL VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - National Green Tribunal"].

• Role and Status of Central Ground Water Board ["Haider Ali vs Central Ground Water Board Western Region, Ministry of Water Resources - National Green Tribunal"], ["Engineer-In-Chief Irrigation Dept. Lucknow VS Shiv Nath - Allahabad"]

• The Central Ground Water Board is a regulatory authority, not an industrial establishment, and thus does not fall under the definition of industry ["Haider Ali vs Central Ground Water Board Western Region, Ministry of Water Resources - National Green Tribunal"].

• The Supreme Court’s decision supports that the Board’s functions are regulatory, not industrial, aligning with the conclusion that it is not an industry ["Engineer-In-Chief Irrigation Dept. Lucknow VS Shiv Nath - Allahabad"].

• Conclusion: The Central Ground Water Board is not classified as an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as confirmed by Supreme Court judgments and statutory interpretation. Its role is primarily regulatory concerning groundwater and environmental standards, and it does not engage in systematic production or commercial activities that would qualify it as an industry ["Engineer-In-Chief Irrigation Dept. Lucknow VS Shiv Nath - Allahabad"], ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"].

References:- ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"]- ["THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs M/S NAGARJUNA CONSLTRUCITON CO. LT D. HYD - Telangana"]- ["Assam Real Estate and Infrastructure Developers Association (AREIDA), represented by its President Sri P.K. Sharma vs State of Assam, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam - Gauhati"]- ["SANJAY KUMAR PAL VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - National Green Tribunal"]- ["SANJAY KUMAR PAL VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - National Green Tribunal"]- ["Engineer-In-Chief Irrigation Dept. Lucknow VS Shiv Nath - Allahabad"]- ["Haider Ali vs Central Ground Water Board Western Region, Ministry of Water Resources - National Green Tribunal"]