SC: Under RTE Act, States Cannot Justify Low Teacher Pay by Citing Centre’s Failure to Release Funds  ||  Supreme Court: While a Child’s Welfare is Paramount, It is Not the Sole Factor in Custody Disputes  ||  Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Reject a Plaint While Exercising Jurisdiction under Article 227  ||  SC: Merely Leasing an Apartment Does Not Bar a Flat Buyer’s Consumer Complaint Against the Builder  ||  Delhi HC: Unproven Adultery Allegations Cannot be Used to Deny Interim Maintenance under the DV Act  ||  Bombay HC: Storing Items in a Fridge isn’t Manufacturing and Doesn’t Make Premises a Factory  ||  Kerala HC: Disability Pension is Not Payable if the Condition is Unrelated to Military Service  ||  Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC    

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