9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (5) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an agreement with the Governor-General in Council acting through the Chief Commercial Manager of the East Indian Railway Administration in Calcutta by which they secured the catering rights of providing mineral waters on the East Indian Railway system. By the agreement, they acquired a right to sell their mineral waters on the stations of the East Indian Railway and on the trains running on that railway and under the contract the Government had a right to fix maximum prices and to control to some extent the work of the appellants. 3. A trade dispute occurred between the appellants and their workmen and the Government of West Bengal by its order dated December 28, 1948 referred this dispute for adjudication by Mr. P. K. Sarkar. An applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lants was not a business carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government or by any railway. 7. It must be remembered that the Industrial Disputes Act deals with disputes between employers and labour and industries carried on behalf of or on the authority of Government are also dealt with in Section 2(g) of the Industrial Disputes Act in which the word "employer" is explained. "Employer" means: "(i) in relation to an industry carried on by or under the authority of any department of a Government in British India, the authority is prescribed, the head of the department; (ii) in relation to an industry carried on by or on behalf of a local authority, the Chief Executive Officer of that authority.& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant company was not conducting an industry under or by authority of Government. It was conducting its own business of 'manufacturing and selling soda water and other aerated drinks. For its own benefit it had entered into a contract with Government which gave it the exclusive right of selling these articles on railway stations and trains of the East Indian Railway. It is true that they were doing work which the rail-|way would normally perform, but they were doing it not by the authority of the railway. They were doing it as contractors. The business was not the business of the railway which was being conducted by the appellants as the nominated authority of the railway. The business was the business of the appellants which the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be the workmen of Government. But such obviously is not the case. In my judgment it is quite impossible to hold that the Carlsbad Mineral Water Manufacturing Company Limited is a business carried on by authority of Government. It is a business not owned by Government, but is on the other hand owned by the Carlsbad Mineral Water Manufacturing Company Limited. It is carried on their behalf and for their benefit and any control of Government only arises because of the terms of the contract which this company has entered into with Government a contract which gives them an exclusive right to sell certain articles on railway property. The business or industry is carried on by the appellants and therefore there was an industrial dispute bet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
