Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
It has been held by the Bombay High Court that a co-operative housing society cannot be said to be an ‘industry’ within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act.
The same was ordered while Justice SC Gupte was hearing a writ petition filed by Arihant Siddhi Co-op Housing Society challenging an award passed by the Labour Court, Mumbai, wherein the Society’s erstwhile watchman, the respondent, was reinstated with full back wages and continuity in services was ordered.
Here in this case, the respondent was engaged as a watchman by the society and upon completion of 60 years of age, his services were terminated with effect from November 1, 2000. While the society argues that the termination was with mutual consent, the respondent disputed the claim. Although he had accepted the ex-gratia payment, he argues that he is a permanent employee of the society.
While the society argued that the watchman was rendering personal services, and that the society is not an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, hence, the watchman is not its workman.
The Labour Court held that the profit motive was proved and that the society could not be termed merely as a housing society and falls under the definition of an Industry. It, accordingly, held the reference to be maintainable.
Justice Gupte set aside the Labour Court’s award by stating that whether a cooperative housing society can be termed as an industry or not merely because it carries on some commercial activity, not as its predominant activity, but as an adjunct to its main activity. In the said judgment, the court had held that such society is not an industry.
86540
103860
630
114
59824