SC reserves verdict on ‘industry’
The Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that it is “certainly not anti-labour” and will do everything to protect the interests of workers as a nine-judge Constitution Bench reserved its verdict on the correctness of the 1978 ruling that gave an expansive interpretation of the term “industry”.
The Constitution bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant would decide on the pleas questioning the correctness of the landmark verdict that broadened the term “industry” in the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947, bringing millions of workers under the protective umbrella of the law.
On the third day of the hearing, Attorney General R Venkataramani said, “I have consulted the government. The government is certainly not anti-labour. Labour welfare will be taken care of. We are moving towards a globalised economy and we need to take a call on how to manage the affairs.”
The attorney general, however, sounded an alarm and said that departments like the forest should be declared as an industry, as such an interpretation will adversely impact various governmental activities.
Besides the CJI, the bench also comprised justices BV Nagarathna, P S Narasimha, Dipankar Datta, Ujjal Bhuyan, Satish Chandra Sharma, Joymalya Bagchi, Alok Aradhe and Vipul M Pancholi.
The judgement, keenly awaited across labour and industrial sectors, is expected to have far-reaching consequences on the rights of workers and the applicability of labour protection under the now-repealed Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, even as the bench clarified that its ruling will govern pending and existing disputes under the old regime.
On February 21, 1978, a seven-judge bench delivered a verdict on the definition of the term “industry” while deciding the plea of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board and expanded the definition, which brought millions of employees in hospitals, educational institutions, clubs and government welfare departments under the protection of the Industrial Disputes (ID) Act, 1947.
