How does the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 redefine 'industry' compared to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? Discuss the implications for labour welfare and ease of doing business.

"Industry" under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [4] was judicially widened by the Triple Test in Bangalore Water Supply v. A. Rajappa (1978). With the ID Act's repeal in November 2025, Section 2(p) of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 [1] retains that core but codifies fresh exclusions — continuity at the centre, contraction at the margins.

How the definition shifts

• Core retained: systematic activity through employer–worker cooperation for production, supply or distribution of goods/services satisfying human wants; capital and profit motive remain irrelevant, and spiritual/religious activity stays outside [1].
• Expanded: workers employed through a contractor or agency are expressly covered, statutorily settling contract labour's inclusion [1].
• Narrowed: express carve-outs for charitable, social and philanthropic services, government activity in defence research, atomic energy and space, domestic service, and any activity the Centre notifies [1] — against BWSSB, which excluded only sovereign functions.
• Judicially unsettled: the nine-judge Bench of August 2026 kept the Triple Test for pending ID Act disputes while refining it prospectively for Section 2(p) [5].

Implications for labour welfare

• Positive: a uniform definition across the four Labour Codes curbs definitional litigation; individual dismissal or retrenchment disputes can now go directly to Industrial Tribunals [3], which have judicial and administrative members with time-bound adjudication [2].
• Concern: workers in excluded charitable and philanthropic bodies lose ID machinery; the strike definition now covers mass casual leave by over 50% of workers, and 14-day notice binds all establishments [2][3], compressing bargaining space.

Implications for ease of doing business

• Compliance simplified — rules 105→51, forms 37→18, registers to zero, with minor offences decriminalised and compoundable [2].
• Prior permission for lay-off, retrenchment and closure, and standing orders, apply only at 300 workers [3], easing flexible hiring.

The redefinition thus trades BWSSB's expansive protection for statutory certainty. Judicious use of the Centre's notification power, prompt state rule-making and tripartite consultation can align this flexibility with SDG-8's decent work mandate, making the Code genuinely pro-worker and pro-employment.