spinner

The Supreme Court has raised the question of whether the judgment in the Bangalore Water Supply case should be reevaluated, despite its endurance of 45 years.

Last Updated: 2023-10-12 15:39:26
The Supreme Court has raised the question of whether the judgment in the Bangalore Water Supply case should be reevaluated, despite its endurance of 45 years.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court deliberated whether the judgment in the Bangalore Water Supply case of 1978 should be reconsidered, despite its 45-year tenure.

This matter was briefly discussed while addressing the State of UP v. Jai Bir Singh case, which was listed for the issuance of procedural directions. The Jai Bir Singh case is scheduled to be heard by a nine-bench Constitution bench of the Supreme Court.

The central issue in this case is whether the definition of ‘industry’ under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act) should be interpreted restrictively.

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, while issuing notice to the Attorney General for India and impleading the Union of India, observed that the Bangalore water supply case has been in effect for 45 years and questioned whether it needs to be reviewed and what public injury would be caused.

In 1978, a seven-judge bench had held that the term ‘industry’ should be broadly interpreted, including every profession regardless of profit motive.

However, subsequent cases have called for a more restrictive interpretation of industry, limiting it to manufacturing units.

A five-judge Constitution Bench in 2005 referred the decision in Bangalore Water Supply for reconsideration, and in 2017, a seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court ordered that a nine-judge bench be constituted to hear this 2005 case.

It is noteworthy that Justice YV Chandrachud, the father of the current CJI, was part of the bench that delivered the Bangalore Water Supply decision in 1978.

TAGS: Supreme Court of India Bangalore Water Supply case Nine judge bench


Latest Posts

Supreme Court Upholds Prisoners' Right to Legal Aid in Landmark Ruling

Supreme Court Upholds Prisoner...

Supreme Court’s Verdict in Lalta Prasad Vaish & Sons vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Supreme Court’s Verdict in L...

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Structure for Artificers in Indian Navy

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Stru...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against HDFC Bank in Locker Operation Dispute

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Agai...

Supreme Court Ruling on Corporate Insolvency Proceedings: Vidyasagar Prasad vs UCO Bank

Supreme Court Ruling on Corpor...

Supreme Court Ruling on Yashodeep Bisanrao Vadode's Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court Ruling on Yashod...

Supreme Court Resolves Lease Dispute between Central Warehousing Corporation and Sidhartha Tiles

Supreme Court Resolves Lease D...

Supreme Court Denies Interest on Delayed Pension for

Supreme Court Denies Interest ...