SC: Magistrates Should Not Record Prosecution Evidence in Sessions-Triable Cases  ||  Supreme Court Lays Down Guidelines on Using ITRs to Assess Motor Accident Victims' Income  ||  Supreme Court: Citing AI-Generated Fake Precedents Amounts to Advocate Misconduct  ||  Bombay HC: Horse-Trading Rampant in Maharashtra, FIRs 'Washed' After Switching Sides  ||  Tripura High Court: Senior Citizens Cannot be Penalised For Failing to Follow Cases Online  ||  Delhi High Court: Parent Cannot Gain Advantage by Keeping a Child Against a Foreign Court Order  ||  Allahabad HC: Places of Worship Act Bars Conversion of Religious Character, Not State Acquisition  ||  Jharkhand HC: Single Instance of Mother-In-Law Abusing Daughter-In-Law Does Not Amount to Cruelty  ||  Madras High Court: No Appeal Lies Against E-Court Status or Adjournment Orders  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Judicial Officer Promotion Cannot be Denied on Complaint Without Disciplinary Action    

Mohan Singh and Ors. v. The Chairman Railway Board and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (03 Aug 2015)

Divisional Railway Manager a 'factory'

MANU/SC/0829/2015

Labour and Industrial

The Supreme Court held that a canteen at the Divisional Railway Manager, Moradabad was a 'statutory canteen'. With all requirements of a factory save for 'manufacturing' met, the Court determined repair and maintenance of railways wagons sufficiently constituting manufacturing, and termed the DRM a factory under the Factories Act, 1948. In a plea for absorption, the Court allowed existing staff of the canteen to be regularised with the railway.

Relevant : M.M.R. Khan v. Union of India MANU/SC/0173/1990 Kamla Devi v. Laxmi Devi MANU/SC/0410/2000 Ardeshir H. Bhiwandiwala v. State of Bombay MANU/SC/0236/1961 Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi MANU/SC/1918/2006

Tags : RAILWAY   FACTORY   LABOUR  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved