The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday (October 28, 2026) to hear a petition filed by the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) Tamil Nadu challenging the definition of ‘industry’ under the Industrial Relations Code (IRC) 2020 as “deliciously vague”, especially when the new law exempts a wide array of institutions from charitable to sovereign functions of the government.
A 1978 seven-judge Constitution Bench judgment, authored by Justice V.R. In August 2026, a nine-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice Kant had reviewed the interpretation given by Justice Iyer in 1978 to the definition of ‘industry’ under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, the nine-judge Bench had been preceded by the coming into force of the 2020 Code, which largely made the reference to it infructuous. Narasimha on the nine-judge Bench had agreed with the Chief Justice that an authoritative interpretation of 2(j) had lost its immediacy with the coming into force of the IRC. On Wednesday (October 28, 2026), the CJI said the court would read through the petition and schedule the case for hearing early.
Krishna Iyer, in the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa case, had laid down conditions that any activity which was systematic or organised, operated on the basis of employer-employee cooperation and dealt in the production of goods and services to satisfy human wants came within the ambit of ‘industry’. The judgment had brought even hospitals, educational institutions and municipalities within the fold of ‘industry’. Justice P.S.
The senior counsel said the definition in the Code did not meet the requirements of the ‘triple test’. The majority on the nine-judge Bench in August this year had held that ‘industry’ under Section 2(p) of the Industrial Relations Code (IRC), which came into force in November 2025, would not be “burdened” by the interpretation in the 1978 judgment of Section 2(j) of the 1947 Act.
