Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Industrial Tribunal Award — Charitable Trust Held to be 'Industry' Under Section 2(j) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court found that the trust's systematic and organized activities for employee benefit fall within the definition of industry, affirming the tribunal's jurisdiction.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 9
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Seth Motishaw Lalbaug Jain Charities, a charitable trust, filed a writ petition challenging an award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The trust contended that it does not fall within the definition of 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act), and therefore the Industrial Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to pass the award. The respondent, Bombay General Employees' Association, represented the employees. The court considered the nature of the trust's activities, which involved systematic and organized work for the benefit of its employees. The court applied the broad interpretation of 'industry' as established by Supreme Court precedents, which includes any systematic activity carried on by an employer for the benefit of employees. The court held that the trust's activities constitute an 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the ID Act, and thus the Industrial Tribunal had jurisdiction. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, upholding the award of the Industrial Tribunal.

Headnote

A) Industrial Law - Definition of Industry - Section 2(j) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Charitable Trust - The petitioner-trust challenged an award of the Industrial Tribunal on the ground that it is not an 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the ID Act. The court examined the activities of the trust and held that the trust's activities, being systematic and organized for the benefit of employees, fall within the definition of 'industry'. The court relied on the broad interpretation of 'industry' as laid down by the Supreme Court. (Paras 1-5)

B) Industrial Law - Jurisdiction of Industrial Tribunal - Section 10 Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Industrial Tribunal had passed an award in a dispute between the trust and its employees. The court upheld the tribunal's jurisdiction, finding that the trust's activities constitute an industry, and thus the tribunal had the authority to adjudicate the dispute. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a charitable trust falls within the definition of 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and is therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the award of the Industrial Tribunal. The court held that the petitioner-trust is an 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Industrial Tribunal had jurisdiction.

Law Points

  • Definition of industry under Section 2(j) of Industrial Disputes Act
  • 1947
  • Jurisdiction of Industrial Tribunal
  • Charitable trust as industry
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (12) 208

Writ Petition No. 1946 of 1997

2025-12-12

Sandeep V. Marne, J.

Mr. Pradyumna D. Sharma with Mr. Piyush Shah, Mr. Gautam P. Khobragade, Mr. Randhirkumar N. Mondal & Ms. Nishi Jain for the Petitioner. Mr. Arshad Shaikh, Senior Advocate, Amicus Curiae. Ms. Neeta Karnik, Senior Advocate, Amicus Curiae.

Seth Motishaw Lalbaug Jain Charities

Bombay General Employees’ Association & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging an award of the Industrial Tribunal on the ground that the petitioner-trust is not an 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought to quash the award of the Industrial Tribunal and to declare that it is not an 'industry' under the ID Act.

Filing Reason

The petitioner challenged the Industrial Tribunal's award, arguing that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the trust is not an 'industry'.

Previous Decisions

The Industrial Tribunal had passed an award against the petitioner-trust.

Issues

Whether the petitioner-trust falls within the definition of 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Whether the Industrial Tribunal had jurisdiction to pass the award against the trust.

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioner argued that its activities are charitable and not for profit, and thus it does not constitute an 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the ID Act. The respondent employees' association contended that the trust's activities are systematic and organized, falling within the definition of 'industry'.

Ratio Decidendi

The ratio decidendi is that a charitable trust, if its activities are systematic and organized for the benefit of employees, falls within the definition of 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and is subject to the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal.

Judgment Excerpts

This Petition is filed by the Petitioner-Trust challenging the Award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, essentially raising a plea that it does not fall in the definition of the term ‘industry’ under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act) and that therefore it is not amenable to the jurisdiction of Industrial Tribunal.

Procedural History

The Industrial Tribunal passed an award against the petitioner-trust. The trust then filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the award on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. The High Court dismissed the petition, upholding the award.

Acts & Sections

  • Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Section 2(j), Section 10
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Industrial Tribunal Award — Charitable Trust Held to be 'Industry' Under Section 2(j) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court found that the trust's systematic and organized activities for employ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Petition Challenging Execution Orders in Arbitration Award Enforcement — Upholds Attachment of Property and Rejection of Objections Under Order XXI Rule 58 CPC.