APHC010357762004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 20284 of 2004 Bench Sr.No:-26 [3506] The Management, Sir C.R. Reddy College of Eng, W.G. Dist ...Petitioner Vs. The Gen Secretary, C.R.Reddy College of Eng, W.G.Dist and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Petitioner: C VENKAIAH Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP FOR LABOUR, G RAMA GOPAL CORAM : SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 9th February 2026 ORDER: The present writ petition assails the award dated 30.07.2003 passed in I.D. No.207/96 on the file of Labour Court at Guntur. The 1st respondent union has instituted reference under Section 10-1(c) of The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein after, for short ‘the Act’). The non-teaching staff of subject engineering college claimed for pay scales as per PRC 1986 and PRC 1993, as the same was not acceded to by the management, reference was sought for under the provisions of the Act. 2. (a) The Management has taken a stand before the Tribunal that, since it is self-financing institution, no aid is being 2 CGR, J W.P. No.16131 of 2005 received from the Government and that the operation and maintenance of institution purely depend on the fees that would be collected from the students, therefore, it cannot be treated on par with Government entities for claiming salaries. (b) That apart, the Management has also taken stand that it would not come within the purview of ‘Industry’ for invoking provisions of the Act, nor the members of respondent Union would be termed as workman as envisaged under the definition of ‘workman’ under the provisions of the Act. (c) The Tribunal has eventually, following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply Sewerage Board v. R.Rajappa1, held that the writ petitioner would fall within the expression ‘industry’ amenable to the jurisdiction under the provisions of the Act. Insofar as the claim of non-teaching staff for the pay scales, recording the statement and admission of the institution that they have been implementing the pay scales as specified by AICTE, which is the Regulatory Authority insofar as Engineering Colleges are concerned, the I.D. came to be disposed of accordingly. 1 (1978) 2 SCC 213 3 CGR, J W.P. No.16131 of 2005 3. Learned counsel for petitioner, while reiterating the averments made in the writ petition, contended that the writ petitioner cannot be brought under the purview of the Act, inasmuch as it cannot be said to be ‘Industry’ as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act. He further contended that the order of the Tribunal insofar as directing the writ petitioner to extend the pay scales in terms of AICTE Regulations, is clearly perverse, even if the management has admitted to the said factum, in law, it cannot be directed to be adhered to as it is a self-financing institution. 4. Learned counsel for respondents tried to support the order passed by the Tribunal by reiterating and supporting the findings recorded therein. 5. Perused the record and considered the rival submissions. 6. The first issue, as to whether educational institutions would fall within the meaning of expression ‘industry’ as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act, is no more res integra. The Tribunal has indeed followed the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply Sewerage Board1. Even Division Bench of this Court in Govind Kumuda Sushma v. State of 4 CGR, J W.P. No.16131 of 2005 Andhra Pradesh and others2 took similar view. Therefore, first ground that has been canvassed no longer survives. 7. Coming to the other aspect, the Tribunal merely reiterated the admission made by the college to follow AICTE norms for the purpose of paying scales to the non-teaching staff. Much water has flown later inasmuch as any private unaided non-minority educational institutions are now being governed by the provisions of The Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983, coupled with The Andhra Pradesh Higher Education Regulatory and Monitoring Commission (Amendment) Act, 2020. The provisions of these enactments would govern the colleges insofar as the fixation of fee structure, which indirectly would have a consequence on the pay structure and colleges that would be paid to the both teaching as well as non-teaching staff. The commission under the Andhra Pradesh School Education Regulatory and Monitoring Commission Act, 2019, has been bestowed with functions to determine the fee structure, taking into consideration the salaries that would be paid to the non-teaching staff as well. 2 2021 SCC OnLine AP 75 5 CGR, J W.P. No.16131 of 2005 8. In that view of the matter, even otherwise the order passed by the Tribunal really does not call for any interference. I find no merit in the writ petition. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending in this case, if any, shall stand closed. CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J ss