

1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 25.08.2008 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court, whereby the Division Bench dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellant-All India Institute of Medical Sciences (hereinafter referred to as 'the AIIMS'). The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:

i) The Respondent-Raj Singh, who was working as a driver in the AIIMS on daily wages since 01.08.1984 continued to work as such till 13.08.1987 and, thereafter, his services were terminated.

ii) Aggrieved by the termination of his service, Raj Singh approached the Industrial Tribunal raising an industrial dispute in the matter in question.

iii) The matter was referred to the Labour Court and an Award was published by the Court on 04.12.1988 declaring the issues in favour of Raj Singh, the workman, in the matter in question and against the Appellant. By the said Award, Raj Singh was directed to be reinstated in service without backwages.

iv) Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred a Writ Petition before the High Court.

v) The High Court, after going through the facts of this case, and relying on the decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewage Board v. A. Rajappa and Ors. MANU/SC/0257/1978MANU/SC/0257/1978 : (1978) 2 SCC 213 : LNIND 1978 SC 70 : 1978-I-LLJ-349 to the effect that hospitals, research institutes and training centres render valuable material services to the community qualifying for coming within the purview of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 affirmed the Award. Incidentally, that the view in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewage Board v. A. Rajappa and Ors. (supra) was followed by this Court in certain other decisions viz., Dr. V.P. Chaturvedi and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. MANU/SC/0617/1991MANU/SC/0617/1991 : (1991) 4 SCC 171 : LNIND 1991 SC 380 as well as in V.L. Chandra and Ors. v. AIMS and Ors. MANU/SC/0296/1990MANU/SC/0296/1990 : AIR 1990 SC 1670 : (1990) 3 SCC 381 : LNIND 1990 SC 178 : 1990-II-LLJ-29 was also noted.

vi) In view of the said authorities, the High Court held that there is no reason to hold that the AIIMS did not come within the purview of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act and passed the order in favour of Raj Singh.

vii) Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal has been filed by the AIIMS.

2. We have heard learned Counsel appearing for both the parties.

3. However, after going through the facts of the case and after taking into consideration the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court, we do not find that it is necessary for us to go into the details further in the matter as the issue has presently been settled by this Court in the said decision.

4. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.

5. We find no merit in the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed, however, with no order as to costs.

