The Supreme Court has notified a nine‑judge Constitution Bench to review the broad interpretation of the term “industry” given in the 1978 Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa judgment.
Key Developments
- Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant with Justices BV Nagarathna, PS Narasimha, Dipankar Datta, Ujjal Bhuyan, Satish Chandra Sharma, Joymalya Bagchi, Alok Aradhe and Vipul M. Pancholi.
- Hearings scheduled for 17–18 March 2026.
- Four core issues identified, including the correctness of the test laid down in paragraphs 140‑144 of the 1978 judgment and the effect of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and newer labour codes on the definition of “industry”.
Important Facts
- The 1978 decision, authored by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, held that any systematic activity organised by employer‑employee cooperation for production or distribution of goods/services could be termed an industry, irrespective of profit motive.
- The bench will examine whether the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 and the dormant Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 1982 modify the earlier definition.
- Questions also arise on whether social‑welfare schemes of government departments and activities classified as “sovereign function” fall within the ambit of Section 2(j) of the ID Act.
Exam Relevance
Understanding this bench is vital for GS‑2 (Polity) and GS‑3 (Economy) aspirants. The case illustrates:
- How constitutional benches shape the interpretation of statutory terms, affecting labour policy and industrial relations.
- The interaction between older judicial pronouncements and newer legislative reforms like the Industrial Relations Code, highlighting the dynamic nature of law.
- The balance between state‑run activities (sovereign functions) and private sector regulation, a recurring theme in governance questions.
Way Forward
Depending on the bench’s verdict, possible outcomes include:
- Re‑narrowing the definition of “industry”, limiting the scope of labour‑law applicability to profit‑oriented enterprises.
- Affirming the expansive view, thereby extending industrial dispute mechanisms to a broader set of activities, including many government schemes.
- Providing clarity on the interplay between the Industrial Relations Code and the ID Act, guiding future legislative amendments.
For UPSC preparation, candidates should track the final judgment, analyse its implications for labour law reforms, and relate it to broader themes of constitutional interpretation and economic governance.