Judgement Briefs

Labour Law

Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam v. Commissioner of Labour, Government of Andhra Pradesh

1977 SCC OnLine AP 103; (1979) 1 LLJ 448 (AP)

Citation
1977 SCC OnLine AP 103; (1979) 1 LLJ 448 (AP)
Court
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Date
26 July 1977
Bench
Division Bench - Madhava Rao and Alladi Kuppuswami, JJ.

Facts

  • Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams was a public religious and charitable institution responsible for administering temples and providing facilities to pilgrims.
  • It maintained several departments, including:
  • water-supply works;
  • electrical and power works;
  • transport;
  • workshops;
  • hospitals;
  • educational institutions; and
  • other supporting establishments.
  • Employees working in the Power and Water Works Wings formed unions and obtained registration under the Trade Unions Act, 1926.
  • The Devasthanams applied to the Registrar for cancellation of the registrations.
  • It argued that:
  • its central object was religious worship and charity;
  • it was not carrying on a trade, business or industry;
  • its supporting departments were merely ancillary to the religious institution; and
  • the employees could not be regarded as workmen employed in a trade or industry.
  • The Registrar refused to cancel the registrations.
  • The Devasthanams challenged that refusal before the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

Issue

  • Whether the religious character of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams prevented registration of unions formed by employees of its Water and Power Wings.
  • Whether those departments could be examined separately from the institution’s dominant religious purpose.
  • Whether the employees were workmen connected with a trade or industry under the Trade Unions Act.

Rule

  • The legal character of an establishment is determined from the real nature of the activities performed through employer–employee cooperation.
  • A religious or charitable institution may contain severable departments which carry on organised material or service activities.
  • Where a department:
  • is systematically organised;
  • employs workers;
  • performs material services; and
  • resembles an activity capable of being performed by an ordinary commercial or public utility undertaking, it may possess an industrial character.
  • The institution’s overall religious object does not automatically control every separate department.
  • Trade-union legislation should be interpreted so that employees performing industrial or service work can collectively regulate their relations with the employer.

Application

  • The Court accepted that worship and performance of religious ceremonies formed the primary purpose of the Devasthanams.
  • Employees directly concerned with purely spiritual or ritual functions might stand on a different footing.
  • The unions before the Court, however, represented employees of the Power and Water Works Wings.
  • Those workers did not perform priestly or devotional functions.
  • They generated, maintained and distributed electricity and water required for:
  • the temple complex;
  • residential premises;
  • administrative establishments; and
  • facilities used by large numbers of pilgrims.
  • Supplying power and water was a material service of the same general nature as services provided by municipal bodies, electricity undertakings or public utilities.
  • The departments had:
  • separate organisation;
  • technical staff;
  • defined operational functions; and
  • continuing employer–employee cooperation.
  • Their work did not become religious merely because the services ultimately supported a temple administration.
  • The Court therefore applied a functional rather than purely institutional test.
  • It rejected the argument that every activity controlled by a religious body automatically acquired a religious character.
  • The relevant question was what the particular employees actually did and whether their department operated as an organised service undertaking.
  • Since the Water and Power Wings were capable of being distinguished from the essential religious functions, their employees could form associations regulating their employment relationship.
  • Registration did not interfere with worship, temple rituals or religious administration.
  • It merely gave the technical and operational employees the statutory benefits attached to a registered union.

Conclusion

  • The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the registrations of the unions representing employees of the Water and Power Works Wings.
  • It held that those severable departments possessed an industrial character notwithstanding the Devasthanams’ overall religious purpose.
  • The Registrar had therefore correctly refused cancellation.
  • The writ petitions filed by the Devasthanams were dismissed.
  • Use this case for: a religious institution may contain separate industrial departments, and employees performing material utility services may form a registered trade union.