CENTRAL SECRETARIAT CLUB Vs. GEETAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Under challenge, in the present writ petition, is an award, dated 16th July, 2004, whereby the Labour Court No. VII (hereinafter referred to as "the Labour Court") has directed payment, by the Central Secretariat Club (hereinafter referred to as "The Club") of Rs. 15,240.00, to the workman Geetam Singh, for the period Oct., 1992 to Sept., 1995.

(2.) The aforementioned award has been assailed, before this Court, by Geetam Singh as well as by the Club, vide W.P (C) 19106/2005 and W.P (C) 17474/2004 respectively.

(3.) The facts are brief Geetam Singh, the applicant, who was undisputedly employed by the Club registered a claim, under Sec. 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for the difference in wages between the amount paid to him by the management of the club and the minimum wages payable to him under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for the period during which he worked with the Club i.e.13th Sept. 1989 till 30th Sept. 1995. The management of the Club contested the claim of Geetam Singh, before the Labour Court, by urging that (i) the club was not an "industry" as its membership was confined to employees of the Central Secretariat and (ii) the claim of Geetam Singh was belated, as he had filed his claim petition only in 1995 claiming difference of wages from 1989. The Labour Court rejected the preliminary submission, of the Club, to the effect that it was not an "industry", by placing reliance on the classic pronouncement of Krishna Iyer, J., speaking for the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. R. Rajappa, (1978) 3 SCC 297 which categorically held that clubs were also industries. A reading of the said judgment makes it clear that the applicability of the Act was exempted only in a case in which the enterprise was clearly charitable in nature, without any financial transaction being involved. Mr. Satya Narayan Vashisht, appearing for the petitioner candidly admitted the fact that his client did in fact, charge subscription from its members. As such, no error can be discerned, in the finding of the Labour Court, to the effect that the club was an "industry" within the meaning of the Act.