STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. JUDGE LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners seek to challenge the award dated March 15, 2001 of the learned Labour Court No. 2 Jaipur whereby the order dated June 7, 1994 terminating the services of the respondent workman was declared illegal and the respondent workman was directed to be reinstated in the services with all back wages.

(2.) IN the statement of claim filed before the court below the respondent workman averred that he was taken on job on the post of Chowkidar (watchman) vide order dated February 9, 1992 and since then he continued to carry on work but on June 7, 1994 he was removed from services. The petitioner approached the Reconciliation Officer and on failure of the reconciliation proceedings following point was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication-

(3.) AS the activities of Women and Child Development Department Neem Ka Thana relate to the development and welfare of the child and women, it was to my mind, rightly held as 'industry' by the learned Labour Court. In Anil Kumar Sharma vs. District Women Development Agency (supra) the Division Bench of this Court observed that 'district Women Development Agency Banswara being akin to the 'district Rural Development Agency" that was not held 'industry' by the Supreme Court in State of U. P. vs. Arun Kumar Singh (3), could not be treated as 'industry'. The activities of the 'district Development Agency' have not been spelled in Anil Kumar Sharma's case. Therefore after placing reliance on the ratio of Bangalore Water Supply case (supra) and Devi Singh vs. State of Raj. (supra) which is squarely applicable on the point in controversy in the instant case, I hold that the Women and Child Development Department Neem Ka Thana is an Industry as defined in Section 2 (j) of the Act.