TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Telecom Department of India Classified as 'Industry' under Industrial Disputes Act</h1> <h3>GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM Versus S. SRINIVASA RAO & ORS.</h3> The Supreme Court determined that the Telecom Department of the Union of India qualifies as an 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act, applying the ... - Issues:- Determination of whether the Telecom Department of the Union of India qualifies as an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.Analysis:The Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether the Telecom Department of the Union of India falls under the definition of 'industry' as per Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Court highlighted that the amendment made in 1982 to the definition of 'industry' had not been enforced by the Central Government, making it irrelevant to the current case. The Court referred to the decision in Bangalore Water Supply case, emphasizing the need to consider the earlier definition of 'industry' in force. The Court noted that the crucial question was whether the Telecommunication Department of the Union of India could be classified as an 'industry' based on the existing definition.The Court discussed the dominant nature test established in the Bangalore Water Supply case to determine whether an establishment qualifies as an 'industry.' The test considers the integrated nature of activities and the predominant nature of services provided. The Court observed that the Telecommunication Department of the Union of India engages in commercial activities and is not involved in sovereign functions, leading to the conclusion that it meets the criteria to be classified as an 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act.The Court reviewed previous judgments, including the Theyyam Joseph case and the Bombay Telephone Canteen Employees' Association case, which held differing views on whether certain departments, including the Postal Department, were part of the sovereign functions of the state and thus not considered an 'industry.' The Court emphasized that the decisions in these cases conflicted with the seven-judge Bench decision in the Bangalore Water Supply case, which established the binding precedent. The Court upheld the decision in the Bangalore Water Supply case, stating that it was imperative to follow established precedents and judicial discipline.In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the Telecommunication Department of the Union of India qualifies as an 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act, based on the dominant nature test and the precedents set by the Bangalore Water Supply case. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to established legal principles and precedents in reaching its decision.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
