Appeal No 572 of 1966
Appeal by special leave from the Award dated September 2 1964 of the Industrial Tribunal Madras in industrial Dispute No 19 of 1964
B R Dolai E C Agarwala Champat Rai Kartar Singh Suri Ambrish Kumar and PC Agrawala for the appellant
H R Gokhale MR Narayanaswamy Iyer and R Ganapathy Iyer for the respondent
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah J
The Industrial Tribunal Madras by its award September 2 1964 has held that the management of the Gymkhana Club Madras is not liable to pay bonus to its workmen for the year 1962 as the Club is not an industry 
The Madras Gymkhana Club Employees Union now appeals to this Court by special leave
The Madras Gymkhana Club is admittedly a members  club and not a proprietary club On December 31 1962 its membership was about 1200 with 800 active members
The object of the club is to provide a venue for sports and games and facilities for recreation and entertainment
For the former it maintains a golf course tennis courts rugby and football grounds and has made arrangement for billiards pingpong and other indoor games
As part of the latter activities it arranges dance dinner and other parties and runs a catering department which provides and refreshments not 745 only generally but also for dinners and parties on special occasions
The club employs six officers a Secretary a Superintendent and four Accountants and Cashiers twenty clerks and a large number of peons stewards butlers gate attendants etc
Its catering department has a separate managerial clerical and other staff
Altogether there are 194 employees
The affairs of the club are managed by a Committeeelected annually
Two of the members of the Committee work as Hony
Secretary and Hony
Treasurer res pectively
The membership of the club is varied
There are resident members non resident members temporary members garrison members independent lady members etc
The resident members pay an entrance fee of Rs 300 and Rs 20 per month as subscription
Garrison members and independent lady members do not pay any entrance fee and their subscription is Rs 10 per month
Guests both local and from outside are admitted subject to certain restrictions as to the number of days on which they can be invited to the club
The club runs tournaments for the benefit of members and for exhibition to non members
The income and expenditure of the club are of the order of four and a quarter lakh rupees its movable and immovable properties are worth several lakh rupees and its wage bill is between one and two lakh rupees
The question in this appeal is whether the respondent club can be said to be an industry for the application of the 
The Tribunal after considering many decisions rendered by this Court and also by the High Courts in India came to the conclusion that the club was not an industry and the claim for bonus on behalf of its employees was therefore unsustainable
The appellant union contends that the decision of the Tribunal is not correct and that the club must be treated as an industry for the application of the Act
As we are concerned primarily with the question whether the club comes within the definition of industry  as given in the  we may begin by reading that definition and other provisions which have a bearing upon the question
The was passed to make provision for the investigation and settlement of industrial disputes and for certain other purposes appearing in the Act
The emphasis in the Act is primarily upon the investigation and settlement of industrial disputes
The expression industrial despute is defined by section 2k as follows industrial dispute means any dispute or difference between employers and employers or between employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen which is connected with the employment or non employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour of any person
746 A Industry is defined in cl
j as follows industry means any business trade undertaking manufacture or calling of employers and includes any calling service employment handicraft or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen
The word employer is defined by cl
g of the section as employer means i in relation to an industry carried on by or under the authority of any department of the Central Government or a State Government the authority prescribed in this behalf or where no authority is prescribed the head of the department  ii in relation to any industry carried on by or on behalf of a local authority the chief executive officer of that authority Workman is defined by cl
s of the section and  means any person including an apprentice employed in any industry to do any skilled or unskilled manual supervisory technical or clerical work for hire Cr reward
whether the terms of employment be expressed or implied and for the purpose of any proceeding under this Act in relation to an industrial dispute includes any person who has been dismissed discharged Or retrenched in connection with or as a consequence of that dispute or whose dismissal discharge or retrenchment has led to that dispute but does not include any such person i who is subject to the  or the  or the Navy Discipline Act 1934 or ii who is employed in the police service or as an officer or other employee of a prison or iii who is employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity or iv who being employed in a supervisor capacity draws wages exceeding five hundred rupees per mensem or exercises either by the nature of the duties attached to the office or by reason of the powers vested in him functions mainly of a managerial nature
 These definitions have been before this Court on many occa sions and we have reached a point when one can say that at least some attributes of industry and industrial disputes may be taken as well established
These cases concerned such diverse institutions and establishments as municipalities hospitals solicitor s 747 firm and university
Any enquiry to determine the application of the definitions to new establishments cannot overlook the settled view
We find it convenient to say a few words about the earlier decisions of this Court before embarking upon an analysis of the definitions in relation to a members  club
The earliest case in this Court involved a dispute between a Municipality and its employees DN Banerjee vs PR Mukherjee  Ors1
The Municipality wag held to be an industry and the dispute was held to be an industrial dispute
This Court observes that the non technical or ordinary meaning of industry  is an undertaking where capital and labour co operate with each other for the purpose of producing wealth in the shape of goods machines tools etc and for making profits and an industry in this sense includes agriculture horticulture etc
The Court points out that this is too wide and that every aspect of employer employee connection does not result in an industry
Holding however that municipal activity cannot be truly regarded as business or trade this Court considers whether it can be an undertaking 
The suggestion that the word undertaking  takes its colour from the other four words in the first part of the definition is not accepted
It is said that this interpretation renders the word superfluous and the latter part of the definition unnecessary
Therefore this Court includes non profit undertakings in the concept of industry even if there is no private enterprise
Referring to the inclusion of public utility services in the scheme of the Act it is held that a dispute in a public utility service is an industrial dispute and the fact that the enterprise is financed by taxation and not by capital is considered irrelevant
In formulating these dicta the Court is obviously influenced by the analysis of an industrial dispute by Isaacs and Rich
in Federated Municipal  Shire Council Employees of Australia vs Melbourne Corporation2
Industrial disputes occur when in relation to operations in which capital and labour ate contributed in co operation for the satisfaction of human wants and desires those engaged in cooperation dispute as to the basis to be observed by the parties engaged respecting either a share of the produce or any other terms and conditions of their cooperation
The question of profit making may be important from an income tax point of view as in many municipal cases in England but
from an industrial dispute point of view it cannot matter whether the expenditure is met by fares from passengers or from rates
 In the second case Baroda Borough Municipality vs Work men3 a claim for bonus by municipal employees was rejected on 1  2  3 748 the ground that the bonus formula was inapplicable
The Court however went on to observe It is now finally settled by the decision of this Court in   that a municipal undertaking of the nature we have under consideration is an industry within the meaning of the word in section 2j of the and that the expression industrial dispute in that Act includes disputes between the municipality and their employees in branches of work that can be regarded as analogous to the carrying on of a trade or business emphasis added
These two cases lay down that for an activity to be an in dustry it is not necessary that it must be carried on by private enterprise or must be commercial or result in profit
It is sufficient if the activity is analogous to the carrying on of a trade or business and involves cooperation between employers and employees
This result is reached by extending the meaning of undertaking  to cover adventures not strictly trade or business but objects very similar
The definition of employer  in our Act clearly shows that a local authority may become an employer if it carries on an industry
This means that a municipality if it indulges in an activity which may be properly described as industry may be involved in an industrial dispute
Local bodies are primarily subordinate branches of governmental activity
They function for public purposes but some of their activities may come within the calling of employers although the municipalities may not be trading corporations
Local authorities take away part of the affairs of Government in local areas and they exercise the powers of regulation and subordinate taxation
They are  political sub divisions and agencies for the exercise of governmental functions
But if they indulge in municipal trading or business or have to assume the calling of employers they are employers whether they carry on or not business commercially for purposes of gain or profit
The activity of the municipality in the first two cases was not attempted to be brought within the expressions business and trade
The term undertaking  was held to cover it
In the third case Corporation of City of Nagpur vs Employees 1 the need to consider trade and business  arose directly
The question then was whether and to what extent the Corporation of Nagpur was an industry under the CP  Berar Industrial Disputes Settlement Act 1947 That Act included a definition of industry which was different
It included a any business trade manufacturing or mining undertaking or calling of employers 1  749 b any calling service employment handicraft or indus trial occupation or avocation of employees and c any branch of an industry or a group of industries In this definition the qualifying words manufacturing or mining  limited the word undertaking  and it could not be given the wide meaning given earlier
This Court did not attempt to bring municipal activity within the word undertaking  but brought it within the expression trade and business 
The Court observed that there was nothing in the earlier cases to show that a municipal activity was held excluded from those words
As a matter of fact it did see p 308
Of course there was nothing to show that this Court on the earlier two occasions thought it even remotely possible
In the Nagpur Corporation s1 case the Court proceeded to consider whether a corporation could be legitimately said to be carrying on business or trade or calling
It found the definition to be very clear and not susceptible of any ambiguity and observed that all the words were very wide and that even if the meaning could be cut down by the aims and objects of the CP  Berar Act as disclosed in the preamble the main object namely social justice demanded a wide meaning
The Court distinguished between a regal and b municipal functions of the corporation and found the latter analogous to business or trade because they were not regal and the activity was organised and service was rendered
To distinguish between a regal function and a municipal function the test applied was Can the service be performed by an individual or firm for remuneration This test was not applied in one later case but is not enlightening because there is hardly any activity which private enterprise cannot carry on
As Mr Gomme in his Principles of Local Government 1897 observes Any municipal service can be made to pay dividends on private capital if only the means of levying a revenue are granted to private owners
 Even war can be financed and waged by commercial houses
They manufacture ammunition and war equipment and can carry on war with mercenaries
Even the infra structures of Adam Smith can be provided by private enterprise
The East India Company did both
It is not a little surprising that except in one case in which there is a passing reference to it the Corporation of City of Nagpur case1 has not been referred to in the later cases of this Court
The later cases of this Court view the matter a little differently and formulate further tests
Of the tests the first is that the activity must be organised as business or trade is ordinarily organised
This is to be taken with the earlier test that undertaking  must be analogous to business trade or calling
It will be seen that these do not widen the meaning of undertaking  but tend to narrow it
The second is that the activity need not necessarily be preceded by procurement of capital in the business sense nor must 1  750 profit be a motive
So long as relationship of employer and workmen is established with a view to production of material goods or material services the activity must be regarded as an undertaking analogous to trade or business
We shall now review the cases in which these tests are established 
In the State of Bombay vs Hospital Mazdoor Sabha1 it is held that a hospital run by government is included in the definition of industry 
It is recognised that the first part of the definition contains the statutory meaning and the second part means an enlargement of it by including other items of industry
As a matter of fact these are not other items of industry but aspects of occupation of employees which are intended to be an integral part of an industry for purposes of industrial disputes
It is however recognised in the case that a line must be drawn to exclude some callings services and undertakings
It is hold that domestic personal or casual services are not included and examples are given of such services
The meaning of industry a  an economic activity  involving investment of capital and systematically carried on for profit for the production or sale of goods by the employment of labour is again discarded because profit motive and investment of capital are considered unessential
Another test reaffirmed is to enquire can such activity be carried on by private individual or group of individuals Answering that a hospital can be run by a private party for profit it is held that a hospital is an industry even if it is run by Government without profit
Who conducts the activity or whether it is for profit are considered irrelevant questions
It is however again emphasised that an under taking to be an industry must be analogous to trade or business
It is therefore laid down that an activity systematically or habitually undertaken for the production or distribution of goods or for rendering material services to the community at large or a part of such community with the help of employees is an undertaking
In this way the connection between trade and business on the one hand and undertaking on the other is established which seems to indicate that the expression undertaking  must take its colour from the other expressions
An industry is thus said to involve cooperation between employer and employees for the object of satisfying material human needs but not for oneself nor for pleasure nor necessarily for profit
These dicta are based on the observations of Isaacs J quoted earlier and in a later case The Federated State School Teachers  Association of Australia vs The State of Victoria and Others2
In the next case Ahmedabad Textile Industry Research As sociation vs State of Bombay3 the question was whether an Association for research maintained by the textile industry and employing technical and other staff was industry
The case repeated the tests stated in the Hospital1 case and applied them
It was held 1  2  3  751 that the Association was providing material services to a part of the community was carried on with the help of employees was organised in a manner in which trade or business is organised and there was co operation between employers and employees
For the first time a fresh test was added that as the employees had no rights in the results of their labour or in the nature of business and trade the partnership is only association between the employer and employee
However in the next case of National Union of Commercial Employees vs M R Meher1 where the employees of a firm of solicitors demanded bonus and the case satisfied the tests so far enumerated a new test was added that the association of capital and labour must be direct and essential
The service of a solicitor was regarded as individual depending upon his personal qualifications and ability to which the employees did not contribute directly or essentially
Their contribution it was held bad no direct or essential nexus with the advice or services
In this way learned profes sions were excluded
In the next two cases the difficulty of laying down tests from case to case was felt
In Harinagar Cane Farm vs The Stale of Bihar2 a cane farm was purchased by a sugar factory and worked As a department for supply of sugar cane
The agricultural operations were held to be an industry on the facts but it was held that agriculture under all circumstances could not be called an industry
This Court reversed its method of looking for the tests from other cases and referred to them only after it had reached its conclusion observing that the Court must refrain from laying down unduly broad or categorical propositions
In the next case University of Delhi and Anr
vs Ramnath3 the question was whether bus drivers employed by the University were workmen
The concept of service was narrowed and it was held that the educational institutions were not an industry
Their aim was education and the teachers  profession was not to be assimilated to industrial workers
This Court again stated that it must not be understood as laying down a general proposition
The changes made in the meaning of the expressions used in the definition of industry in the Act disclose a procrustean approach to the problem
The words must mean something definite but some of the tests were found unsatisfactory to cover new cases as the creation of new tests clearly shows
For example the emphasis resulting from the extension of the definition in its latter part to include services of employees received little recognition in the later cases
Too much insistence upon partnership between employers and employees is evident in the Solicitor s1 case and 1 1962 Supp 3 SCR 157
2  3  752 too little in the Association1 case
And yet it is impossible to think that this test is universal
What partnership can exist between the Company andor Board of Directors on the one hand and the menial staff employed to sweep floors on the other What direct and essential nexus is there between such employees and production This proves that what must be established is the existence of an industry viewed from the angle of what the employer is doing and if the definition from the angle of the employer s occupation is satisfied all who render service and fall within the definition of workman come within the fold of industry irrespective of what they do
There is then no need to establish a partnership as such in the production of material goods or material services
Each person doing his appointed task in an Organisation will be a part of the industry whether he attends to a loom or merely polishes door handles
The fact of employment as envisaged in the second part is enough provided there is an industry and the employee is a workman
The learned professions are not industry not because there is absence of such partnership but because viewed from the angle of the employer s occupation they do
not satisfy the test
A solicitor earns his livelihood by his own efforts
If his work requires him to take help from menials and other employees who carry out certain assigned duties the character of the solicitor s work is not altered
What matters is not the nexus between the employee and the product of the employer s efforts but the nature of the employer s occupation
If his work cannot be described as an industry his workmen are not industrial workmen and the disputes arising between them are not industrial disputes
The cardinal test is thus to find out whether there is an industry according to the denotation of the word in the first part
The second part will then show what will be included from the angle of employees
We shall now apply this approach to the definition in the light of the earlier decisions of this Court in so far as they are consistent and then determine whether the club in this case can come within the meaning of industry  as determined by us
The definitions have been set out by us earlier in this judgment
The definitions are inter related and are obviously knit together
Stated broadly the definition of industrial dispute  contains two limitations
Firstly the adjective Industrial  relates the dispute to an industry as defined in the Act and secondly the definition expressly states that not disputes and differences of an sorts but only those which bear upon the relationship of employers and workmen and the terms of employment and conditions of labour are contemplated
As such dispute may arise between different parties the Act equally contemplates disputes between employers and employers or between employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen
The definition of the expression industrial dispute  further shows that certain disputes can never be considered under the Act
For example disputes between Government 1  753 and an industrial establishment or between workmen and non workmen are not the kind of disputes of which the Act take notice
The word employer  is not specifically defined but merely indicates who is to be considered an employer for purposes of an industry carried on by or under authority of a department of Government and by or on behalf of a local authority
This definition gives little assistance because it is intended to operate in relation to an activity properly describable as an industry and this takes one back to the definition of industry 
The definition of workman  is a little better
Although it again refers one back to an industry it gives some guidance
Workman means any person employed to do skilled or unskilled manual supervisory technical or clerical work for hire or reward
The expression however does not include persons employed in some named services of Government
Even in an industry those employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity and supervisors drawing more than live hundred rupees as wages or exercising functions mainly of a managerial nature are also to be left out of the definition
In this way the general nature of the dispute the parties to the dispute and the contents of the dispute are therefore reasonably clear
A dispute must however be an industrial dispute or as the several definitions already noticed say must arise in relation to an industry
This is where the difficulty begins because the statutory definition of industry  has led to some divergence of views in the Labour Tribunals the High Courts and even in this Court
The definition of industry  is in two parts
In its first part it means any business trade undertaking manufacture or calling of employers
This part of the definition determines an industry by reference to occupation of employers in respect of certain activities
These activities are specified by five words and they determine what an industry is and what the cognate expression indus trial  is intended to convey
This is the denotation of the term or what the word denotes
We shall presently discuss what the words business trade undertaking manufacture or calling
comprehend
The second part views the matter from the angle of employees and is designed to include something more in what the term primarily denotes
By the second part of the definition any calling service employment handicraft or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen is included in the concept of industry
This part gives the extended connotation
If the activity can be described as an industry with reference to the occupation of the employers the ambit of the industry under the force of the second part takes in the different kinds of activity of the employees mentioned in the second part
But the second part standing alone cannot define industry 
An industry is not to be found in every case of employment or service
An individual who employs a cook gets service from his employee whose avocation is to serve as a cook but as the activity of the individual is neither business nor trade nor an 754 undertaking nor manufacture nor calling of an employer there is no industry
By the inclusive part of the definition tile labour force employed in an industry is made an integral part of the industry for purposes of industrial disputes although industry is ordinarily something which employers create or undertake
The definitions in the are borrowed from other statutes
The definition of industrial dispute  is taken from an Act of 1906 6 Edw
VII c 47 and slightly modified
There the definition ran  any dispute between employers and workmen which is connected with the employment or non employment or the terms of the employment or with the conditions of labour of any person
Our definition only adds to the list of disputes one between employers and employers
Similarly the latter part of the definition of industry  which has caused us some trouble is taken from section 4 of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act which inclu des in the concept of industry  any calling service employment handicraft or industrial occupation or avocation of employers on land and water
 Decisions rendered on these definitions and some others very similar have naurtally influenced opinion making in this Court
The Australian cases in particular have been subrosa all the time
The difficulty in using Australian cases with a text book approach is perhaps not quite noticed
The term industrial dispute  which the Australian High Court was defining was from section 51XXXV of the Constitution Act
There was no definition of the expression and it was recognised that the common understanding of that expression was not what was meant but something different
In a great body of cases the problem presented its many facets and the approach was pragmatic
Higgins J in 26 Com
L R cautioned against giving a crystallised meaning to the expression
He observed It is not necessary or as I think desirable that we should in answering the specific question asked of us commit ourselves to a final exhaustive definition of a popular phrase as that in question p 574
In the Harinagar Cane Farm1 and the University2 cases this Court also made a similar observation
In the former it was observed We have referred to these decisions only to emphasise the point that this Court has consistently refrained from laying down unduly broad or categorical propositions 
1  2 2 SCR 703
755 The attempt to avoid generalisations however commendable has one disadvantage
In Australia the Courts were dealing with the problem without a definition and thought that they should move cautiously to avoid hardening any particular view too far
We have all the terms except employer  defined by the statute
Our task is to give meanings to the words which are intended to lay down the full connotation
Taking each operation by itself and determining on the basis of facts whether it is an industry without attempting to pin point whether it is a business or a trade or an undertaking or manufacture
or calling of employers is to ignore somewhat the guidance afforded by the statute through its own dictionary
Therefore while we accept the views expressed uniformly we think any view which seems contradicted by later decisions because it was unrelated to the words of the definitions should not be allowed to harden
We also take the opportunity of relying a little more on the guidance from the Act
The principles so far settled come to this
Every human activity in which enters the relationship of employers and employees is not necessarily creative of an industry
Personal services rendered by domestic and other servants administrative services of public officials service in aid of occupations of professional men such as doctors and lawyers etc
employment of teachers and so on may result in relationships in which there are employers on the one side and employees on the other but they must be excluded because they do not come within the denotation of the term in dustry 
Primarily therefore industrial disputes occur when the operation undertaken rests upon cooperation between employers and employees with a view to production and distribution of material goods in other words wealth but they may arise also in cases where the cooperation is to produce material services
The normal cases are those in which the production or distribution is of material goods or wealth and they will fall within the expressions trade business and manufacture
The word trade  in this context bears the meaning which may be taken from Halsbury s Laws of England Third Edn
38 p 8 a exchange of goods for goods or goods for money b any business carried on with a view to profit whether manual or mercantile as distinguished from the liberal arts or learned professions and from agriculture and business means an enterprise which is an occupation as distinguished from pleasure
Manufacture is a kind of productive industry in which the making of articles or material often on a large scale is by physical labour or mechanical power
Calling denotes the following of a profession or trade
These words have a clear signification and are intended to lay down definite tests
Therefore the principal question and the only 756 legitimate method is to see where under the several categories mentioned a particular venture can be brought
Of these categories undertaking  is the most elastic
According to Webster s dictionary undertaking  means anything undertaken or any business work or project which one engages in or attempts as an enterprise 
It is this category which has figured in the cases of this Court
It may be stated that this Court began by stating in Banerji s case2 that the word undertaking  is not to be interpreted by association with the words that precede or follow it but after the Solicitor s2 and the University3 cases it is obvious that liberal arts and learned professions educational undertakings and professional services dependent on the personal qualifications and ability of the donor of services are not included
Although business may result in service the service is not regarded as material
That is how the service of a Solicitor firm is distinguished from the service of a building corporation
Otherwise what is the difference between the services of a typist in a factory and those of another typist in a Solicitor s office or the service of a bus driver in a municipality and of a bus driver in a University The only visible difference is that in the one case the operation is a part of a commercial establishment producing material goods or material services and in the other there is a non commercial undertaking
The distinction of an essential or direct connection does not appear to be so strong as the distinction that in the one case the result is the production of material goods or services and in the other not
It is therefore clear that before the work engaged it can be described as an industry it must bear the definite character of trade  or business  or manufacture  or calling  or must be capable of being described as an undertaking resulting in material goods or material services
Now in the application of the Act the undertaking may be an enterprise of a private individual or individuals
On the other hand it may not
It is not necessary that the employer must always be a private individual who carries on the operation with his own capital and with a view to his own profit
The Act in terms contemplates cases of industrial disputes where the Government or a local authority or a public utility service may be the employer
The expansion of Governmental or municipal activity in fields of productive industry is a feature of all developing welfare states
This is considered necessary because it leads to welfare without exploitation of workmen and makes the production of material goods and services cheaper by eliminating profits
Government and local authorities act as individuals do and the policy of the Act is to put Government and local authorities on a par with private individuals
But Government 1  2 1962 Supp 3 SCR 157
3  757 cannot be regarded as an employer within the Act if the operations are governmental or administrative in character
The local authorities also cannot be regarded as industry unless they produce material goods or render material services and do not share by delegation in governmental functions or functions incidental thereto
There is no essential difference between educational institutions run by municipalities and those run by universities
And yet a distinction is sought to be made on the dichotomy or regal and municipal functions
Therefore the word undertaking  must be defined as any business or any work or project which one engages in orattempts as an enterprise analogous to business or trade
 This is the test laid down in Banerji s case1 and followed in the Baroda Borough Municipality case2
Its extension in the Corporation case3 was unfortunate and contradicted the earlier cases
Next where the activity is to be considered as an industry it must not be casual but must be distinctly systematic
The work for which labour of workmen is required must be productive and the workmen must be following an employment calling or industrial avocation
The salient fact in this context is that the workmen are not their own masters but render service at the behest of masters
This follows from the second part of the definition of industry
Then again when private individuals are the employers the industry is run with capital and with a view to profits
These two circumstances may not exist when Government or a local au thority enter upon business trade
manufacture or an undertaking analogous to trade
The labour force includes not only manual or technical work men but also those whose services are necessary or considered ancillary to the productive labour of others but does not include any one who in an industrial sense will be regarded by reason of his employment or duties
as ranged on the side of the employers
Such are persons working in a managerial capacity or highly paid supervisors
Further the words are industrial dispute  and not trade dispute 
Trade is only one aspect of industrial activity business and manufacture are two others
The word also is not industry in the abstract which means diligence or assiduity in any task or effort but a branch of productive labour This requires cooperation in some form between employers and workmen and the result is directly the product of this association but not necessarily commercial
The expressions terms of employment  and Conditions of labour  indicate the kind of conflict between those engaged in in dustry on opposite but cooperating sides
These words take in dispute as to the share in which the receipts in a commercial venture 1  2 3  LPN78CI 9a 758 shall be divided and generally cover hours of work and rest recognition of representative bodies of workmen payment for piece work wage ordinary and overtime benefits holidays etc
The definition takes in disputes between employees and employees such as demarcation disputes and disputes between employers and employers such as wage warfare in an area where labour is scarce and disputes of a like character
The whole paraphernalia of settlement conciliation arbitration voluntary as well as compulsory agreements awards etc
shows that human labour has value beyond what the wages represent and therefore is entitled to corresponding rights in an industry and employers must give them their due
Industry is the nexus between employers and employees and it is this nexus which brings two distinct bodies together to produce a result
We do not think that the test that the workmen must not share in the product of their labours adopted in one case can be regarded as universal
There may be occasions when the workmen may receive a share of the produce either as part of their wages or as bonus or as a benefit
This ends discussion of what is an industry
We are now in a position to consider whether the Madras Gymkhana Club fulfills the tests laid down by this Court and accepted here by us
in sup
port of the claim on behalf of the Employees Union our attention was drawn to two decisions of the Calcutta High Court relating to the Bengal Club Ltd1 and Royal Calcutta Golf Club2
Both decisions are by a learned single Judge
They were cases of incorporated companies running clubs for profit and as business
There are however observations which are clearly obiter that even a non proprietary members  club is an industry
Founding itself on those observations the Union contends that the club in the present case must also be treated as an industry
In fine the claim is based on the following considerations a that the club is organised as an industry is organised on a vast scale with multifarious activities b that facilities of accommodation catering sale of alcoholic and non alcoholic beverages games etc
are provided c that the club runs parties at which guests are freely entertained and d that the club has established reciprocal arrangements with other clubs for its members
In our opinion none of these considerations is sufficient to establish that the club is an industry within the We cannot go by the size of the club or the largeness of its membership or the number or extent of there activities
We have to consider the essential character of the Club activity in relation to the definition of industry
As we said before the definition is in two parts
The first part which we called the denotation or the meaning of the word shows what an industry really is and the 1 AIR 1956
2 AIR Cal
759 second part contains the extended connotation to indicate who will be considered an integral part of the industry on the side of employees
Beginning with the second part it may at once be conceded that the activity of the club is conducted with the aid of employees who follow callings or avocations
Therefore if the activity of the employers is within the realm of industry the answer must be in favour of the Union
But the first part of the definition it may also be said that the club does not follow a trade or business
Its activity cannot be described as manufacture and the running of clubs is not the calling of the members or its managing committee
The only question is is it an undertaking Here the appearances are somewhat against the club
It is not of any consequence that there is no profit motive because that is considered immaterial
It is also true that the affairs of the club are organised in the way business is organised
and that there is production of material and other services and in a limited way production of material goods mainly in the catering department
But these circumstances are not truly representative in the case of the club because the services are to the members themselves for their own pleasure and amusement and the material goods are for their consumption
In other words the club exists for its members
No doubt occasionally strangers also take benefit from its services but they can only do so on invitation of members
No one outside the list of members has the advantage of these services as of right
Nor can these privileges be bought
In fact they are available only to members or through members
If today the club were to stop entry of outsiders no essential change in its character vis a vis the members would take place
In other words the circumstance that guests are admitted is irrelevant to determine if the club is an industry
Even with the admission of guests being open the club remains the same
that is to say a member s self serving institution
No doubt the material needs or wants of a section of the community is catered for but that is not enough
This must be done as part of trade or business or as an undertaking anlogous to trade or business
This element is completely missing in a members  club
It is contended that although there is no incorporation as such the club has attained an existence distinct from its members
It may be said that members come and members go but the club goes on for ever
That is true in a sense
We are not concerned with members who go out
The club belongs to members for the time being on its list of members and that is what matters
Those members can deal with the club as they like
Therefore the club is identified with its members at a given point of time
Thus it cannot be said that the club has an existence apart from the members
760 It is said that the case of the club is indistinguishable from the Hospital1 case
That case is one which may be said to be on the verge
There are reasons to think that it took the extreme view of an industry
We need not pause to consider the Hospital1 case because the case of a members  club is beyond even the confines established by that case
In our judgment the Madras Gymkhana Club being a members  club is not an industry and the Tribunal was right in so declaring
The appeal fails and is dismissed but we make no order about costs
G C Appeal dismissed


Summary:
The respondent is a non proprietary members  club
It is organised on a vast scale with multifarious activities providing a venue for sports and games and facilities for recreation entertainment and for catering of food and refreshment
Guests are admitted but on the invitation of members
It has 194 employees with a wage bill between one lakh and two lakh rupees
For the year 1962 the employees claimed bonus but the Industrial Tribunal held that the club was not an industry  within the meaning of the  and rejected the claim of the employees In appeal to this Court
Held 1 The definitions of industrial dispute employer  and workman  show that an industrial dispute can only arise in relation to an industry 
The definition of industry  is in two parts the first from the point of view of employers and the second from the angle of employees
In its first part it means any trade business undertaking manufacture or calling of employers 
This part determines an industry by reference to occupation of employers in respect of those activities specified by the five words and they determine what an industry  is and what the cognate expression industrial  is intended to convey
But the second part standing alone cannot define industry 
If the existence of an industry viewed from the angle of what the employer is doing is established all who render service and fall within the definition of workman  come within the fold of industry  irrespective of what they do
Thus the cardinal test is to find out whether there is an industry according to the denotation of the word in the first part
753 A 754 H
Taking the words in the definition of industry  the word trade  means exchange of goods for goods or goods for money or any business carried on with a view to profit whether manual or mercantile as distinguished from the liberal arts or learned professions and from agriculture
The word business  means an enterprise which is an occupation as distinguished from pleasure
and manufacture  is a kind of productive industry in which the making of articles or material often on a large scale is by physical labour or mechanical power
The word calling  denotes the following of a profession or trade
756 F H
The word undertaking  has figured in the cases of this Court
In D N Banerjee vs P R Mukherjee 1953 SCR 302 it was observed that the word is not to be interpreted by association with the words that precede or follow it in the definition of industry 
But the settled view of this Court is that primarily industrial disputes occur when the operation undertaken rests upon cooperation between employers and employees with a view to production and dis tribution of material goods in other words wealth but they may 743 arise also in cages where the cooperation is to produce material services
For an undertaking  to be an industry it is not necessary that it must be carried on with capital by private enterprise or that it must be commercial or result in profit but there must be systematic activity and it must be analogous to the carrying on of a trade or business involving co operation between employers and em ployees
But every human activity in which the relationship of employers and employees enters is not necessarily creative of an industry
Personal services rendered by domestic and other servants administrative services of public officials 
services in aid of occupations of professional men such as doctors and lawyers etc
 employ ment of teachers and so on may result in relationships in which there are employers on the one side and employees on the other but they have been excluded because they do not come within the connotation of the term industry  as the service rendered is not a material service
Therefore the word undertaking  though elastic must take its colour from other expressions used in the definition of industry  and must be defined as any business or any work or project resulting in material goods or material services and which one engages in or attempts as an enterprise analogous to business or trade
L740 D 756 D F 758 D E 757 B C 758 B C
In the present case the activity of the club is conducted with the aid of employees who follow callings or avocations
But taking the first part of the definition and the essential character of the club the activity of the club cannot be described as a trade  business or manufacture  and the running of clubs is not the calling  of the respon dent club or its managing committee
Also the club has no existence apart from its members
It exists for its members though occasionally strangers also take benefit from its services
Even with the admission of guests the club remains a members  self serving institution
Though the material needs or wants of a section of the community is catered for it is not done as part of trade or business or as an undertaking analogous to trade or business
Therefore the Tribunal was right in holding that the respondent club was not an industry
760 A H
Baroda Borough Municipality vs Workmen  referred to Observations contra in Bengal Club Ltd vs Shantiranjan Som maddar  Anr
AIR 1956 Cal
545 and Royal Calcutta Golf Mazdoor Union vs State of West Bengal AIR 1956 Cal
550 disapproved
2 The case of State of Bombay vs Hospital Mazdoor Sabha  so far as it relied on the test namely could the activity be carried on by a private individual or group of individuals for the purpose of holding that running a Government hospital was an industry must be held
to have taken an extreme view of what is an industry
This test is not enlightening because there is hardly any activity which private enterprise cannot carry on
751 D E 761 A 750 E F
3 In Corporation of City of Nagpur vs Employees  this Court relied upon the same test with an unfortunate result
The Court held that the municipal functions of the Corporation including running a primary school were covered by the words trade and business  in CP  Berar Industrial Disputer
Settlement Act 1947 since those functions were not regal the activity was organised service was rendered and the functions could not be performed by an individual or firm for remuneration while in University of Delhi vs Ramnath 1964 2 SCR 703 this Court held that educational institutions were not industry 
750 B G 758 A B
744 4 The fresh test laid down in Ahmedabad Textile Industry Research Association vs State of Bombay  that to be an industry  the employees therein must not share in the product of their labour cannot be regarded as universal because there are occasions when the workmen receive a share of the produce as part of their wages or as bonus or as a benefit
759 C
5 The additional test laid down in National Union of Commercial Employees vs Meher The Solicitor case 1962 Supp 3 SCR 157 that to be an industry  the association of capital and labour must be direct and essential cannot also be regarded as universal because what partnership can exist between the Board of Directors of a Company on the one hand and the menial staff employed to sweep floors on the other 753 A
6 In Harinagar Cane Farm vs State of Bihar  and in the University case this Court observed that it must refrain from laying down unduly broad or categorical propositions
But the attempt to avoid generalizations his one disadvantage because taking each operation by itself and determining on the basis of facts whether it is an industry without attempting to pin point whether it is a business or a trade or an undertaking or manufacture or calling of employers  is to ignore the guidance afforded by the sta tute through its dictionary and to rely upon decisions dealing with the problem without a definition
755 H 756 A C