Justice Nagarathna’s dissent warns of tearing the frayed safety net of labour law
Expansive definition of ‘industry’ in 1978 judgment ensures labour welfare and checks skewed corporate bargaining power, says Justice Nagarathna
Justice B.V. Nagarathna's dissent in the Supreme Court, spanning 147 pages, warns of potential upheaval to the labor protection net as the court dismantles the broad definition of 'industry' in a 1978 judgment. In her dissent, Justice Nagarathna expresses concern that the majority's decision to erase the influence of the 1978 ruling (Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v.
R. Rajappa) could unleash a "supercharged" version of corporate bargaining power in future industrial disputes under the new Industrial Relations Code 2020 (IRC). The lone woman judge on the nine-judge bench disagreed with the majority's conclusion, emphasizing that the 1978 judgment, once a critical safeguard for labor rights, served as a bulwark against state withdrawal from its welfare obligations for nearly half a century as India shifted towards privatization.
Justice Nagarathna referenced an 1880 English case law (Greaves v. Tofield) to highlight the relevance of past judicial pronouncements when new laws replace old ones, cautioning that any findings on the correctness of the Bangalore Water Supply case would cast a shadow on the definition of 'industry' under Section 2(p) of the IRC, urging the majority to reconsider their decision.
Written by urgent.news from The Hindu's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
