Introduction

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that cleaning, washing, and dry cleaning of clothes fall under the definition of “manufacturing process” as per the Factories Act, 1948. This verdict, delivered in The State of Goa & Another vs. Namita Tripathi, has significant implications for the laundry industry across India. The Court emphasized that a transformation or creation of a new product is not a prerequisite for an activity to be classified as a manufacturing process.

Background of the Case

The case arose from an inspection conducted in May 2019 at the premises of White Cloud, a professional laundry service run by Namita Tripathi in Goa. Authorities discovered multiple violations under the Factories Act, including:

• The absence of factory-approved plans (as per Rule 3 of the Goa Factories Rules, 1985).
• Operating as a factory without a valid license (violating Rule 4 and Section 6 of the Factories Act).
• Failure to register the factory and obtain a license (as required under Rule 6 and Section 6 of the Act).
• Employing more than nine workers and lacking a proper muster roll.

Following these findings, the authorities issued a notice demanding compliance within 15 days. However, the respondent argued that laundry services do not constitute a “manufacturing process” and should instead be governed by the Shops and Establishments Act. Despite further hearings, the authorities proceeded with legal action.

On December 4, 2019, the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) at Panaji issued a summons against the respondent for violating Section 92 of the Factories Act. Tripathi then challenged the summons before the Bombay High Court, which ruled in her favor, holding that dry cleaning does not qualify as a manufacturing process. This prompted the State of Goa to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

A Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan overturned the Bombay High Court’s decision. The key takeaways from the ruling include:

1. Definition of Manufacturing Process

The Court clarified that, under Section 2(k) of the Factories Act, “washing or cleaning” of any article for delivery is covered under the term “manufacturing process.” It rejected the High Court’s reasoning that a transformation must occur, or a new article must be created, for an activity to qualify as a manufacturing process.

2. Laundry Businesses Qualify as Factories

Since White Cloud employed more than ten workers and used power, the Court held that the premises met the definition of a “factory” under Section 2(m) of the Factories Act.

3. Rejection of Bombay High Court’s Findings

The Supreme Court ruled that the High Court erred in concluding that dry cleaning does not amount to a manufacturing process. The judgment emphasized that social welfare laws like the Factories Act should be interpreted in a manner that benefits workers.

4. Restoration of Complaint Against the Respondent

The Supreme Court set aside the Bombay High Court’s judgment, restoring the complaint against Namita Tripathi. The case will now proceed before the JMFC in Panaji as per legal provisions.

Implications of the Judgment

1. Impact on Laundry and Dry Cleaning Industry

The ruling categorizes laundry businesses as manufacturing units under the Factories Act. This means that establishments employing ten or more workers must comply with regulations related to:

• Factory registration and licensing.
• Workplace safety and hygiene standards.
• Employee welfare provisions, such as working hours and benefits.

2. Legal Precedent for Other Service Industries

The judgment sets a precedent for other service-based industries where transformation is minimal. This could impact businesses like car washing, carpet cleaning, and equipment servicing, requiring them to comply with factory laws.

3. Increased Regulatory Compliance for Small Businesses

Many small-scale laundries and dry cleaners may now be subject to stricter labor and factory laws. Compliance costs may increase, potentially affecting pricing and business operations.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision reinforces a broad interpretation of the Factories Act, ensuring labor law protections for workers in laundry businesses. While the ruling brings clarity, it also imposes additional regulatory requirements on laundry service providers. As the case proceeds in lower courts, its impact on similar industries will become clearer.

This landmark judgment highlights the evolving nature of industrial laws in India and the judiciary’s role in protecting workers’ rights. Businesses in the service sector must now reassess their legal obligations under the Factories Act.

https://wp.me/peEAVD-4yV