AIIMS is Not an Industry - The courts have consistently held that AIIMS (All India Institute of Medical Sciences), including its management and operations, does not qualify as an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Several judgments have emphasized that AIIMS functions primarily as a hospital or educational institution rather than an industrial establishment. For example, in multiple cases (e.g., SULABH INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATION VS REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) - Delhi, A. I. I. M. S. New Delhi VS Uddal & Ors. - Delhi, AIIMS vs Sh.Satpal Singh & Ors - Delhi, AIIMS vs Sh.Satpal Singh & Ors - Delhi), the courts have ruled that AIIMS does not fall within the definition of an industry, and thus, the applicability of the Industrial Disputes Act is limited or inapplicable.
Legal Clarifications and Evidence - Courts have noted that whether AIIMS is an industry is a significant issue but often remains unresolved explicitly because the primary focus is on employment rights and disputes. In some cases (e.g., ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (AIIMS) vs RAJ SINGH - Delhi, ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (AIIMS) vs RAJ SINGH - Delhi), the courts highlighted that evidence regarding AIIMS's status as an industry was either not led or was deemed unnecessary for resolving the dispute. The courts have also clarified that even if AIIMS were considered an industry, certain proceedings would still be valid if initiated correctly.
Implications for Workers and Disputes - The consistent finding that AIIMS is not an industry means that workers' rights and dispute resolutions are governed by different legal frameworks, not the Industrial Disputes Act. For instance, in cases involving wages or employment disputes, the courts have upheld that AIIMS's status as a non-industry limits the scope of industrial law protections (A. I. I. M. S. New Delhi VS Uddal & Ors. - Delhi, A.I.I.M.S. vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Delhi).
Overall Conclusion - The predominant judicial view is that AIIMS functions as a hospital and educational institution, not an industry. Therefore, the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, does not generally apply to AIIMS, affecting how employment disputes are adjudicated and the rights of workers within this institution.
References: - SULABH INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATION VS REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) - Delhi, A. I. I. M. S. New Delhi VS Uddal & Ors. - Delhi, AIIMS vs Sh.Satpal Singh & Ors - Delhi, AIIMS vs Sh.Satpal Singh & Ors - Delhi, ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (AIIMS) vs RAJ SINGH - Delhi, ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (AIIMS) vs RAJ SINGH - Delhi, Project Dir Dep of Rural Devel VS Its Workmen through DPVVIEUN - Delhi, Symed Labs Ltd. VS Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. - Delhi, A.I.I.M.S. vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Delhi, Omega Elevators VS Union Of India - Delhi
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 -Section 25F - Continuous working of 240 days - Burden of proof - Daily Wager would not ... have a letter of appointment and would not have a receipt or proof of payment of wages to show he had worked for more than 240 days ... It has already been submitted by the management that the petitioner is not a workman under the I.D.Act and the Management/AIIMS is not an industry defined under the I.D.Act.” ... 20. ... He firstly submits that the finding recorded ....
Since the workman had already filed his evidence by way of affidavit on all the issues, therefore, whether AIIMS is an industry or not has not been treated as a preliminary issue as whether AIIMS is an industry or not is not solely a question ... The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in the claim petition nothing has been stated by the workman whether AIIMS is an industry or....
Since the workman had already filed his evidence by way of affidavit on all the issues, therefore, whether AIIMS is an industry or not has not been treated as a preliminary issue as whether AIIMS is an industry or not is not solely a question ... The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in the claim petition nothing has been stated by the workman whether AIIMS is an industry or....
Whether the petitioner is an industry or not, and whether the Industrial Disputes Act is applicable to the petitioner? ... Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the petitioner is not an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, but it is ... Having held as above, the second point whether the petitioner-establishment is an industry or not become entirely academic because even if it was held to be an industry, the initiation of the proceeding itself being bad an....
an industry that had not been considered by the Labour Court. ... It was contended on behalf of the appellant before the learned Single Judge that AIIMS was a hospital and not an “industry” within the purview of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 („ID Act‟). ... Gurmit Singh (2007) 5 SCC 727 to contend that evidence had not been led before the Labour Court in regard to the issue whether AIIMS is an industry and that the case should be remand....
an industry that had not been considered by the Labour Court. ... It was contended on behalf of the appellant before the learned Single Judge that AIIMS was a hospital and not an “industry” within the purview of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 („ID Act‟). ... Gurmit Singh (2007) 5 SCC 727 to contend that evidence had not been led before the Labour Court in regard to the issue whether AIIMS is an industry and that the case should be remand....
The management contended that it was not an 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the workmen should ... Finding of the Court: The Industrial Tribunal found that the management's contention that it was not an 'industry' ... Issues: The main issues were whether the management qualified as an 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes ... The whole undertaking will be "industry" although those who are not "workmen" by definit....
was not granted. ... The Court also found that damages would not be an efficacious remedy, and there would be irreparable loss and injury if the injunction ... It is averred that intermediates obtained in the process of manufacture of Linezolid as claimed by the Plaintiff has been known in the pharmaceutical industry for a long time prior to the Plaintiffs alleged development of the process or the intermediates. ... AIIMS), New Delhi. 14. ... The defendants have not led any evidence whatsover in regard ....
It is clarified that issue as to whether AIIMS is "industry" or not is kept open. 8. ... Since the workmen in any case, shall be entitled to back wages at the rate at which minimum wages are payable, it is made clear that the workmen shall not be liable to refund the said amount to the petitioner/management.
Article 14 - Public Procurement - CPWD Office Memorandum - Ministry of Commerce and Industry Order - The court found that the ... excluding the petitioner were violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the orders of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry ... excluding the petitioner were violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the orders of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry ... The above actions of the respondents are not only violative of Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India,....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.