The Supreme Court Hits the Last Nail on The Lid of the Coffin of the Legal Entitlement of Workers’ Rights!
In the‘ independent’ India the question of the legal entitlement of workers’ rights has remained as a mirage, despite the so-called protection of social security and rights envisaged in the Constitution of India, vide its directive principles.
The Industrial Dispute Act 1947 was enacted and is being amended umpteen times from that time onwards and in the end the BJP government had replaced it with the Industrial Relations Code 2020, which came in to force from November 21, 2025.
Though the stated objects and reasons for the industrial disputes act was for‘ rendering the proceedings institutable under the act for settlement of industrial disputes( between industrial managements and workmen), binding on the parties of disputes’, the actual objective was to check industrial unrest on the lines of Rule 81-A of Defence of India Rules and in accordance of the Emergency Power( Continuance) Ordinance- 1946, which proved to be useful to the government. So, by embodying the essential principles of Rule 81-
from page 13 Toxic Gas....
unexpected or unpredictable and unfathomable and this incident was not an isolated misfortune. The concerned authorities have neglected to take necessary precautions and safety measures of testing with a detector, with regard to the presence of methane gas before starting the work at the particular place of HRT, to avoid and avert such sudden explosions of methane gas, but blindly sent in the workers, causing their unwarranted deaths. The NHPC authorities have disregarded taking gas-detection and ventilation safeguards that are
14
A of Defence of India rules, retaining in tack of most parts the provisions of Trade Disputes Act 1929 which was mainly intended to keeping production at highest level without interruption and the clamour of the workers to have their share in abnormal war profits in the second world-war and to readjust post-war industrial stocks the‘ independent’ Indian rulers made the‘ Industrial Disputes Act 1947’, to maintain the industrial peace.
The industrial Disputes Act 1947 defined‘ industry’ as means by any business, trade, undertaking manufacture or calling of employers and includes any calling service, employment, handicraft or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen.
This definition became a most controversial term in field of labour adjudication. The term‘ industry’ has been variously interpreted by different judicial tribunals. Sometimes even entirely different meaning has been given to the word. Such contradictory judicial pronouncements have brought the meaning of the term in the state of confusion. The Supreme Court has given judgements
required in that construction work and functioning.
This is how the‘ development projects’ became a human made disaster and a menace to the lives of the vulnerable workers who are the real back-bone of the development. This is the horrid reality of workers of India.
No investigations, and payment of ex-gratias to the families of the deceased worker can absolve the government and NHRC administrators from the crime of killing these workers with wilful culpable negligence and unpardonable carelessness towards human lives, even under the pretext of‘ development’! � in many cases which cannot possibly be reconciled. The whole law on this point has been in the state of confusion, ambiguity and uncertainty mostly affecting the interest of workmen.
Under these confusing state of affairs, the Supreme Court has critically examined the earlier decisions and has interpreted the term‘ industry’ so as to cope with modern socioeconomic currents and to keep pace with industrial developments in the Case of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board vs A. Rajappa( SC 548, 1978). Keeping in clear view of the directive principles of state policy of our country, hopefully to resolve contradictions, to abolish blurred edges, illumine penumbral areas, filling dynamic content and over-ruling contrary judicial precedents the Supreme Court has laid down following principles holding‘ industry’ of wide import: a) where( i) systematic activity( ii). organized by co-operation between employer and employee( the direct and substantial element is chimerical) iii). for the production and / or distribution of goods and services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes( not spiritual or religions but inclusive of material things or services geared to celestial bliss i. e. making on a large scale prased or food prima facia, there is an industry and industry in that enterprise). These three elements are called as Triple tests. b) Absence of profit motive or gainful objective is irrelevant, be venture in the public, joint, private or other sector. c). The true focus is functional and deceive test is the nature of activity with special emphasis on the employer-employee relations. d). If the organisation is a trade or business it does not close to be
Class Struggle