RAMTAHEL RAMANAND AND ORS Vs. AHMEDABAD MANUFACTURING AND CALICO PRINTING COMPANY LTD (CALICO MILLS, AHMEDABAD) AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners filed an application under S. 78(1)A(e) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act against respondent 1, the Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Company, Ltd. (Calico Mills), Ahmedabad, to the second labour court, Ahmedabad, being Application No. 2005 of 1962 praying for a declaration that the respondent-company had committed an illegal change by contravening the terms of an award of the industrial court. The second labour court, Ahmedabad, dismissed the application on the ground that the petitioners could not be said to be employees of the respondent-company as defined by S. 3(13) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The petitioners, thereupon, filed an appeal to the industrial court, Ahmedabad from the order of the second labour court, being Appeal (I.C.) No. 123 of 1963. This appeal was heard by respondent 2 who dismissed the appeal by his order dated 5 February, 1964. As their appeal was dismissed by the industrial court, the petitioners have preferred the present petition whereby they challenge the validity of the findings of the labour court and the industrial court that they could not be considered "employees" of the respondent-company within the meaning of S. 3(13) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act.

(2.) The word "industry" has been defined in S. 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as under :

(3.) The same word has been defined in the Bombay Industrial Relations Act by S. 2(19) which reads as under :