Question

According to the Supreme Court’s judgment, what is the most important factor in determining whether an activity constitutes an industry?

• A. The profit-making motive of the employer
• B. When there are multiple activities carried on by an establishment, its dominant function has to be considered. If the dominant function is not commercial, benefits of a workman of an industry under the Industrial Dispute Act may be given
• C. The nature of the activity and the authority of the employer over its employees
• D. When there are multiple activities carried on by an establishment, all the activities must be considered. Even if one activity is commercial, the employees will not get the benefit of workman of an industry under the Industrial Dispute Act
• A. It reduced labour protections for workers
• B. It extended labour protections to a broader spectrum of workers
• C. It had no significant impact on labour laws
• D. It only affected private sector workers
• A. Any activity involving profit-making
• B. Any systematic activity organized by cooperation between an employer and employees for producing or distributing goods and services
• C. Only activities conducted by private enterprises
• D. Activities limited to manufacturing sectors
• A. Som Vihar Apartment Owners’ Housing Maintenance Society Ltd. v. Workmen, 2009 SC
• B. Anand Vihar Apartment Owners’ Society Ltd. v. Workmen, 2024 SC
• C. Kanchanjunga Building Employees Union v. Kanchanjunga Flat Owners Society & Anr., 2024 SC
• D. None of the above
• A. The Works committee is a body formed by the Central government to address wage disputes between employer and employee in public sector industries
• B. The Works committee is a grievance redressal body constituted by the employer, primarily to promote measures for securing and preserving amity and good relations between the employer and employee
• C. The Works Committee is responsible for making binding decisions on industrial disputes related to layoffs, retrenchment and closure of industrial units
• D. All of the above

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

The Supreme Court's judgment in the landmark case of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa & Others in 1978 clarified the criteria for determining whether an activity constitutes an 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The judgment emphasized the need to consider the dominant function of an establishment when multiple activities are carried out. If the dominant function is not of a commercial nature, then the employees can receive benefits akin to those accorded to workmen of an industry under the Act. This decision ensures a broad interpretation of 'industry' to include a wide range of workers, which promotes labour protections and social justice. The correct answer to the given question is: 

When there are multiple activities carried on by an establishment, its dominant function has to be considered. If the dominant function is not commercial, benefits of a workman of an industry under the Industrial Dispute Act may be given.

Answer 2

The landmark judgment of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa & Others, delivered by the Supreme Court of India in 1978, played a pivotal role in interpreting the term ‘industry’ under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Prior to this judgment, the definition was ambiguous, causing inconsistent applications. The Industrial Disputes Act defined 'industry' broadly, which included any business or service involving employers and employees. However, ambiguity arose regarding statutory bodies and non-profit organizations. In this case, the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board argued it was a statutory body providing public services, not an industry, thus not subject to the Act. The respondents contended that the Board's activities fit the Act's definition of industry. 

The Supreme Court analyzed the term 'industry' and provided a broad, inclusive definition, emphasizing the nature of the activity and the relationship between employers and employees. This broadened interpretation intended to include public utility services, statutory bodies, and some non-profit organizations under the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore, the judgment extended labour protections to a wider range of workers, allowing more employees to access dispute resolution mechanisms and safeguards outlined in the Act.

The broader impact of this judgment was significant as it ensured more workers were covered under labour protections, promoting social justice and enhancing workers' rights in an industrializing nation. Therefore, the correct option is: It extended labour protections to a broader spectrum of workers.

Answer 3

The term 'industry' as defined by the Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa & Others (1978) is best described by the following option: "Any systematic activity organized by cooperation between an employer and employees for producing or distributing goods and services."

This comprehensive interpretation aimed to encompass a wide range of activities under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It highlights the nature of the activity and the relationship between employer and employees rather than focusing solely on profit motives or the type of enterprise. Consequently, the definition extends beyond private enterprises and manufacturing sectors to include public utility services, statutory bodies, and even some non-profit organizations, ensuring broader protection and benefits for employees under the Act.

Answer 4

The Supreme Court's judgment in the case Som Vihar Apartment Owners’ Housing Maintenance Society Ltd. v. Workmen, 2009 SC is significant in interpreting the status of workers employed by associations or societies of apartment owners. The key issue was whether such workers qualify as "workmen" under the Industrial Disputes Act and whether the association itself is considered an "Industry" as defined by the Act.

Under the Industrial Disputes Act, the term "industry" usually refers to any business or trade undertaken by employers. However, in this landmark case, the Supreme Court determined that workers hired by societies or associations for personal services to apartment owners do not fall within the definition of "workmen." Consequently, the associations that employ these workers are not classified as industries under the Act.

This decision aligns with the broader interpretations seen in previous landmark cases, such as the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa & Others, where the definition of "industry" was analyzed comprehensively. Nonetheless, Som Vihar Apartment Owners’ Housing Maintenance Society Ltd. v. Workmen set a unique precedent by differentiating the status of apartment associations and their employees from traditional industrial relations covered under the Act.

Case	Year	Decision
Som Vihar Apartment Owners’ Housing Maintenance Society Ltd. v. Workmen	2009	Workers employed for personal services in societies are not "workmen" under the Act; the society is not an "Industry."

Answer 5

The Works Committee, under the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, serves as a grievance redressal body. Its primary function is to promote measures for securing and preserving amity and good relations between the employer and employee. Unlike a statutory body formed by the Central government, which might address wage disputes specifically in public sector industries, or any committee responsible for making binding decisions on disputes about layoffs, retrenchment, and closures, the Works Committee is constituted by the employer to facilitate harmonious industrial relations. As such, the correct description of its function is: The Works committee is a grievance redressal body constituted by the employer, primarily to promote measures for securing and preserving amity and good relations between the employer and employee.