To understand provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 we should be clear with some important concepts under the Act viz: Industry, Industrial Disputes, Workman, appropriate Government.

a) Industry under the I.D. Act, 1947

According to Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 “industry” means any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling of employers and includes any calling, service, employment, handicraft or industrial occupation or vocation of workmen.

An industry exists only when there is a relationship between employers and employees, the former is engaged in business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling of employers and the latter is engaged in the calling, service, employment, handicraft or industrial occupation and avocation. Thus, the definition can be considered to have two parts. The first part “any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling of employers” is with respect to employer and the second part “any calling, service, employment, handicraft or industrial occupation or vocation of workmen” is with respect to employee.

In Bangalore Water Supply v. A. Rajappa, AIR 1978 SC 548 case, a seven-member Judges’ Bench was constituted to determine the scope of the industry. The triple test working principle was born in the case that is used to check the validity of different establishments. The Triple Test has requisites that are as follows:

1. Systematic Activity
2. Co-operation between the employer and employee
3. Activity concerned with the production of goods and services for the satisfaction of human wants.

Here, the industry will not embody any religious services or other work undertaken out of spiritual bliss. The profit motive stands irrelevant when it comes to any venture. Through the triple test, the focus is concentrated on the functional part emphasizing the employer-employee relations. An establishment that is engaged in philanthropic activities does not cease to become an industry because of it. Thus, if all the above-stated provisions are complied with, then the undertaking can be termed as an ‘industry’ under section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

The Supreme Court, in this case laid down the following guidelines for deciding the dominant nature of an undertaking:

• Where a complex of activities, some of which qualify for exemption, others not, involves the employees on the total undertaking. Some of whom are not “workmen” or some departments are not productive of goods and services if isolated, nature of the department will be the true test. The whole undertaking will be “industry” although those who are not “workmen” definition may not be benefit by the status.
• Notwithstanding with previous clause, sovereign functions strictly understood alone qualify for exemption and not the welfare activities or economic adventures undertaken by Government or statutory bodies.
• Even in departments discharging sovereign functions, if there are units which are industries and they are substantially severable, then they can be considered to come within Section 2(j).

b) Triple Test under I.D. Act:

In Bangalore Water Supply v. A. Rajappa, AIR 1978 SC 548 case, a seven-member Judges’ Bench was constituted to determine the scope of the industry. The triple test working principle was born in the case that is used to check the validity of different establishments. The Triple Test has requisites that are as follows:

4. Systematic Activity
5. Co-operation between the employer and employee
6. Activity concerned with the production of goods and services for the satisfaction of human wants.

Here, the industry will not embody any religious services or other work undertaken out of spiritual bliss. The profit motive stands irrelevant when it comes to any venture. Through the triple test, the focus is concentrated on the functional part emphasizing the employer-employee relations. An establishment that is engaged in philanthropic activities does not cease to become an industry because of it. Thus, if all the above-stated provisions are complied with, then the undertaking can be termed as an ‘industry’ under section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

The Supreme Court, in this case laid down the following guidelines for deciding the dominant nature of an undertaking:

• Where a complex of activities, some of which qualify for exemption, others not, involves the employees on the total undertaking. Some of whom are not “workmen” or some departments are not productive of goods and services if isolated, nature of the department will be the true test. The whole undertaking will be “industry” although those who are not “workmen” definition may not be benefit by the status.
• Notwithstanding with previous clause, sovereign functions strictly understood alone qualify for exemption and not the welfare activities or economic adventures undertaken by Government or statutory bodies.
• Even in departments discharging sovereign functions, if there are units which are industries and they are substantially severable, then they can be considered to come within Section 2(j).

c) ‘Workman’ Under the I.D. Act, 1947:

According to Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, workman means any person (including an apprentice) employed in any industry to do any manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical or supervisory work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied, and for the purposes of any proceeding under this Act in relation to an industrial dispute, includes any such 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

• who is subject to the Air Force Act, 1950 (45 of 1950), or the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950), or the Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957); or
• who is employed in the police service or as an officer or other employee of a prison; or
• who is employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity; or
• who, being employed in a supervisory capacity, draws wages exceeding ten thousand 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.

The first part of the definition determines the question of who is a workman by referring
to the persons included, namely, persons employed in an industry to do any skilled or
unskilled, manual, supervisory, technical or clerical work for hire or reward. It is essential
that the person be “employed in industry”. The industry must be such as is covered by
the definition of the term in the Act. Moreover, the employment must necessarily be for
hire or reward. The terms of his employment may be expressed or implied

The second portion of the definition deals with persons included within its purview. For
the purposes of any proceeding under the Industrial Disputes Act in relation to an
industrial dispute, a workman includes any person who has been dismissed, discharged
or retrenched in connection with or as a consequence of such a dispute, or whose
dismissal, discharge or retrenchment has led to such dispute

The third part of the definition deals with those persons who are specifically excluded
from the scope of the definition, The categories which are excluded have been
mentioned above

d) Appropriate Government Under the I.D. Act, 1947:

According to Section 2(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 “Appropriate Government” means—

(i) in relation to any industrial dispute concerning any industry carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government, or by a railway company or concerning any such controlled industry as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government or in relation to an industrial dispute concerning a Dock Labour Board established under section 5A of the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 (9 of 1948), or the Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited formed and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)], or the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation established under section 3 of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), or the Board of Trustees constituted under section 3A of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 (46 of 1948), or the Central Board of Trustees and the State Boards of Trustees constituted under section 5A and section 5B, respectively, of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), or the Life Insurance Corporation of India established under section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956), or the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)], or the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation established under section 3 of the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961), or the Central Warehousing Corporation established under section 3 of the Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962 (58 of 1962), or the Unit Trust of India established under section 3 of the Unit Trust of India Act, 1963 (52 of 1963), or the Food Corporation of India established under section 3 or a Board of Management established for two or more contiguous States under section 16 of the Food Corporations Act, 1964 (37 of 1964), or the Airports Authority of India constituted under section 3 of the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994 (55 of 1994),or a Regional Rural Bank established under section 3 of the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 (21 of 1976), or the Export Credit and Guarantee Corporation Limited or the Industrial Reconstruction Bank of India the National Housing Bank established under section 3 of the National Housing Bank Act, 1987 (53 of 1987)], or an air transport service, or a banking or an insurance company], a mine, an oilfield, a Cantonment Board,] or a 6 [major port, any company in which not less than fifty-one per cent. of the paid-up share capital is held by the Central Government, or any corporation, not being a corporation referred to in this clause, established by or under any law made by Parliament, or the Central public sector undertaking, subsidiary companies set up by the principal undertaking and autonomous bodies owned or controlled by the Central Government, the Central Government, and

(ii) in relation to any other industrial dispute, including the State public sector undertaking, subsidiary companies set up by the principal undertaking and autonomous bodies owned or controlled by the State Government, the State Government:

Provided that in case of a dispute between a contractor and the contract labour employed through the contractor in any industrial establishment where such dispute first arose, the appropriate Government shall be the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, which has control over such industrial establishment.

e) Industrial Disputes Under I.D. Act, 1947:

According to Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, “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.

Thus, Industrial disputes may be among following different parties:

1. Employers and employers,
2. Employers and workmen and
3. Workmen and Workmen.

• Industrial disputes may be among different parties: (i) Employers and employers, or (ii) Employers and workmen or (iii) Workmen and Workmen.
• Ordinarily, it arises when the workers or trade unions put up their demands before the employer and the latter refuses to consider them.
• In matter relating to industrial dispute interest either of the employer or the worker must be involved.
• Industrial dispute need not be written. It may be oral.
• Industrial disputes may manifest themselves in different forms, such as strikes, lock-outs, Gheraos, go slow tactics, pens down strike, etc.
• Major causes of industrial disputes are wages, bonus, working conditions, trade unions, Retrenchment, working conditions, etc.
• Industrial disputes are classified as interest disputes, grievance or rights disputes, disputes over unfair labour practices, and recognition disputes.
• It relates to employment of the worker, termination of employment, terms of employment, conditions of employment, etc. Matters relating to the personal life of the worker do not constitute industrial dispute.
• It belongs to an industry which is functioning. Disputes belonging to an industry that has since been closed down are not included in it.
• Industrial disputes should relate to matters which are clear. Unless, it is a transparent case its settlement is not possible. 

In Sindhu Resettlement Corporation Ltd. v. Industrial Tribunal, AIR 1968 SC 529 case, the Court observed that an industrial dispute exists only when the same has been raised by the workmen with the employer. A mere demand to the appropriate Government without a dispute being raised by the workmen with their employer regarding such demand, cannot become an industrial dispute.

In Bombay Union of Journalists v. The Hindu, AIR 1963 SC 318 case, the Supreme Court observed that it is enough if industrial dispute exists or is apprehended on the date of reference. Therefore, even when no formal demands have been made by the employer, industrial dispute exists if the demands were raised during the conciliation proceedings.