Case Ttile:
Darul Ullunarabiyyah Islamiyyah Vs. Maulavi Mahmrudul Hasan
Date:
13th June 2022
Bench:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Parties:
Petitioner – Darul Ullunarabiyyah Islamiyyah
Respondent – Maulavi Mahmrudul Hasan
Subject
A petition was filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging the decision rendered by the Labor Court.
Important Provisions
Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act – defines 'industry’
Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act – Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen.
Overview
- The respondent had joined in April 1993 after receiving religious teaching in the same institution.
- He was given the job of running the library.
- The respondent went on to become a “Maulvi”.
- Somewhere in November 2008 the respondent was precluded from discharging duties.
- A legal notice was addressed to the petitioner to which the petitioner replied that there were allegations against the respondent thereby he had to be discharged of his duties.
Issues raised
- Whether Industrial Disputes Act was applicable to institution registered with wakf board, engaged in commercial activity?
Advancements made by the Petitioner
- The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the institution of the petitioner was not engaged in any commercial activity.
- It was running to provide religious teachings to children on non-profit basis.
- The source of income of the petitioner was in the form of donations received from the members of its community.
- The activity carried out by the petitioner in no way can be compared with an industry mentioned under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act.
- The Labour Court had committed an error in considering the petitioners activity to fall under the activity of an industry.
- The respondent was a student of the petitioner institution and thereafter was taken into service.
- The respondent was discharging the duty of religious teacher and cannot be covered under the definition of a workman.
- The learned counsel relied upon the case of A.Sundarmabai Vs. Government of God, Daman and Diu 1988 (4) SCC, 42 where it was stated that the teacher would not fall under the definition of a workman.
- The learned counsel then relied upon the case of Haryana Unrecognised Schools Association Vs. State of Haryana 1996 (4) SCC, 225 where it was stated that the teacher of an educational institution cannot be brought within the purview of minimum wages act especially under Section 2(i) of the Act which defines the expression ‘employee’.
- The learned counsel relied upon the case of Managershri, Panchasara Jain Derasar Vs. Mahamadkhan Gazikhan Baloch, 1993 (1) GLH (UJ), 9, to state that trust was not an industry.
- To support his statement of activity carried out by the institution does not result into large scale production nor the activities are some kinds of services of goods, such institute cannot be classified as “industry”, the learned counsel relied upon the case of Bharat Bhawan Trust Vs. Bharat Bhawan Artists Association (7) SCC, 630.
Advancements made by the Respondent
- The learned counsel for the respondent argued that the respondent being engaged in only in religious teachings does not take him out of the definition of a workman.
- The claim of petitioner institution to be not an industry because it was engaged in religious teaching activity cannot be accepted only because petitioner trust was not registered as an educational institution.
- The learned counsel relied upon the case of Sunni Muslim Wakf Committee Vs. Abdulgani Ishabhai Kachhot in SCA No.4389 of 2008 with SCA No.1106 of 2008, which stated that Sunni Muslim Wakf Committee was to be treated as an industry.
Judgment Analysis
- The Court observed that the Labour Court had rightly arrived at the decision that the termination of the respondent would amount to violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
- The Labour Court had given no findings having completed more than 240 days before passing the impugned order was not a valid argument.
- The petitioner institution not only imparted religious education but was also involved in the activity of printing of magazines and educational books. Thereby, this activity does not take it out of the definition of an ‘industry’.
- In the case of Haryana Unrecognised Schools Association work, the work rendered by the teachers when compared to other workmen it was held that the teachers would come under the definition of employee for all purposes.
Conclusion
The Court concluded by stating that the Wakf Committee was an industry and persons gainfully employed under it was workmen. The petition was allowed.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
