1926 (8) TMI 4 - HC - Indian Laws

Drying yard part of factory under Factories Act, children sorting nuts are employees, liability on occupier/manager.

In Re: V. Ramanadham

The court held that the drying yard constituted part of the factory under the Indian Factories Act as mechanical power was used in a manufacturing process ... - Issues:1. Whether the drying yard forms part of the factory under the Indian Factories Act.2. Whether the employment of children in the factory complies with the Act.Analysis:Issue 1:The petitioner contested that the drying yard where children were employed did not constitute part of the factory. The definition of a factory under Section 2(3) of the Indian Factories Act is broad, encompassing all premises where mechanical power is used in aid of any manufacturing process. The court emphasized that if mechanical power is utilized for a manufacturing process within the premises, the entire area, including yards, is considered a factory. The judgment cited Law v. Graham and Paterson v. Hunt to distinguish between processes considered manufacturing activities and those that are not. The court concluded that the drying yard was indeed part of the factory, as a mechanical decorticator was utilized on the premises, indicating a manufacturing process.Issue 2:The second issue pertained to the employment of children in the factory as per the Act's provisions. Section 46 of the Act deems a child to be employed in the factory if found in an area where children work incidental to a manufacturing process. The court deliberated on whether sorting ground-nuts constituted work connected to the manufacturing process. While sorting alone may not qualify as a manufacturing process, the consistent use of a decorticator for all ground-nuts indicated a manufacturing process. Consequently, it was determined that the children were indeed employed within the scope of the Act. Additionally, the judgment clarified that liability under Section 41 of the Act falls on the occupier or manager, irrespective of who pays the children's wages. No other grounds were raised, leading to the dismissal of the revision petition.This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Madras High Court delves into the interpretation and application of the Indian Factories Act concerning the inclusion of specific premises within the definition of a factory and the criteria for determining the employment of children in compliance with the Act.