Supreme Court Upholds Conviction as Husband Failed to Explain Wife’s Death in Matrimonial Home  ||  Supreme Court: Crime Scene Re-Enactment Does Not Always Violate Right Against Self-Incrimination  ||  Supreme Court: Cognizance Taken Without Hearing Accused under BNSS Section 223 is Void Ab Initio  ||  Supreme Court Upholds Will in Sister’s Favour, Says Excluding Natural Heirs is Not Suspicious  ||  Delhi HC: Absence of Public Witnesses and Videography in NDPS Recovery Relevant for Bail Decisions  ||  Raj HC Initiates Suo Motu Cognizance Over Severe Water Crisis in Jodhpur, Issues Interim Directions  ||  Del HC: Courts Cannot Direct, Monitor Inquiry Into Police Delay in Investigation After Bail Decision  ||  Supreme Court: After the BNSS, a Pre-Cognizance Hearing is Mandatory in PMLA Cases  ||  SC: Landowners Cannot be Forced to Waive Statutory Compensation to Claim Other Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Banks are Lenient With Big Borrowers But Strict With Ordinary Loan Applicants    

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