RADHESHYAM DUBEY Vs. BOARD OF APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE,returnable forthwith. Councel for the Respondents waives service. By consent taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) THIS Petition is directed against an order dated June 5, 2003 passed by the Industrial Tribunal holding that the reference for adjudication under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was not maintainable on the ground that the First respondent is not an industry within the meaning of Section 2 (j) of the Industrial disputes Act, 1947. The First Respondent is an organisation called the Board of apprenticeship Training, Western Region, mumbai. The First Respondent is an autonomous body under the Ministry of human Resources Development, Department of Education, Government of India and is registered under the provisions of the societies Registration Act, 1860. Under the memorandum of Association, the main object of the First Respondent is to organize practical training for graduates and diploma holders in engineering and technology in order to equip them with practical experience for gainful employment. The Board is also conferred with the function of implementing the provisions of the Apprenticeship Act, 1961 in so far as they relate to the training of graduates and technical apprentices. In order to achieve these objects, the Board is required to establish a permanent liaison with technical institutions and industries located in the region comprising of the States as of maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and goa and the Union Territories of Daman and diu. The Board has to secure and provide training facilities in different establishments both in the private arid public sectors; to select student trainees and arrange for their placements; to prepare programmes of training; to supervise training with the help of training field officers; to disburse stipends to trainees; to award certificates to trainees, to arrange dissemination of information and to provide for expert and advisory services in the field of practical training to both technical institutions and industry. The Board is managed by a fund consisting of amounts sanctioned by the Government of India, fees and other charges received by the Board and monies received by way of gifts and donations.

(3.) IN order to decide as to whether the board is an industry, evidence came to be recorded. In so far as this issue is concerned, it would be necessary to extract the following answers that was furnished in the course of the cross examination by the witness who deposed on behalf of the Board. The witness was Mr. S. P. S. Rathore, Director of Training. The witness deposed thus: