Definition of “industry” | Judgement matrix

On 20 August, a nine-judge Constitution Bench pronounced its decision in the reference seeking reconsideration of the definition of “industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 

While the Bench agreed that all pending disputes under the 1947 Act will be decided on the basis of the expansive definition of “industry” laid down in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v A. Rajappa (1978), it differed on other key issues, namely, the triple test for determining an industry and the maintainability of the reference.

The 498-page judgement comprises five opinions, with the first authored by Chief Justice Surya Kant, on behalf of himself and Justices S.C. Sharma, Alok Aradhe and V.M. Pancholi. 

Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Dipankar Datta authored individual opinions dissenting on the maintainability of the reference and the need to refine the triple test. 

Two opinions were authored individually by Justices P.S. Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi. Justice Narasimha declined to enter into the merits of the case in light of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, adding that all pending disputes should be decided as per the 1978 decision. Justice Joymalya Bagchi concurred with the majority on maintainability but dissented on reformulation of the triple test. 

Our judgement matrix provides each judge’s opinion on five key issues.