Supreme Court 9‑Judge Bench 1978 के ‘Industry’ परिभाषा की समीक्षा कर रहा है Bangalore Water Supply केस में

Overview The Supreme Court has convened a 9‑judge bench to re‑examine the definition of industry given by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer in the 1978 Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa judgment. The bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justices BV Nagarathna, PS Narasimha, Dipankar Datta, Ujjal Bhuyan, Satish Chandra Sharma, Joymalya Bagchi, Alok Aradhe and Vipul M. Pancholi, will decide whether the earlier sweeping definition remains appropriate. Key Developments (Live Updates) 17 March 2026, 4:13 PM – Senior Advocate Hegde highlighted concerns about past retirements influencing judgments and requested clarity on the bench’s composition. 17 March 2026, 4:12 PM – Hegde argued that a prior unanimous 6‑judge decision was overturned by a 3‑1‑1 split, creating confusion. 17 March 2026, 4:06 PM – Advocate Naphade stressed that university teachers are not “workmen” and that ancillary university functions should not be classified as industry. 17 March 2026, 4:05 PM – Naphade further explained that regulatory bodies like the University Grants Commission perform statutory functions, not industrial activity. Important Facts The 1978 judgment expanded the definition of industry to include any systematic activity, even non‑profit, if it involved employer‑employee cooperation. A 2002 appeal questioned the breadth of this definition, leading to a referral in 2017 to a 9‑judge bench, mirroring the original bench size. The current reference will determine whether sectors such as education, transport, and public utilities fall within the ambit of the Industrial Disputes Act . Key participants include senior counsel for Karnataka and several senior advocates raising issues of statutory versus commercial functions. UPSC Relevance Understanding the judicial interpretation of "industry" is crucial for GS Paper III (Economy) and GS Paper II (Polity). The definition influences labour law, trade‑union rights, and the applicability of industrial dispute mechanisms to public sector