Commercial establishment definition cannot cover private medical practitioners; amendment held ultra vires and prosecution quashed.

Including medical practitioners within the definition of "commercial establishment" under section 7(1) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 was held to be ultra vires because a private doctor's dispensary is not a commercial establishment. The Court applied the same reasoning previously used to exclude legal practitioners from that definition and found that the amendment could not validly extend the statutory scope to medical practitioners. As a result, the criminal prosecution launched for non-compliance with that provision was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the inclusion of medical practitioners within the definition of commercial establishment under section 7(1) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 is ultra vires and whether prosecution launched for non-compliance with that provision is liable to be quashed.

Analysis: The Court relied on the principle that a private dispensary of a doctor does not amount to a commercial establishment. It applied the same reasoning that had earlier been used to exclude legal practitioners from the scope of commercial establishment. On that basis, the amendment bringing medical practitioners within the definition could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The inclusion of medical practitioners within the definition of commercial establishment was held to be ultra vires, and the criminal prosecution against the petitioner was quashed.

---