that the workmen were already paid closure compensation in accordance with law. As regards the alleged liability of the respondent to obtain prior approval of the Government for closure of the hospital, the Tribunal held that Chapter VB of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was not applicable to the respondent hospital as it was not an industrial establishment as defined by Section 25-L(a)(i) of the Industrial Disputes Act read with Section 2(m) of the Factories Act, 1948. The Tribunal held that the hospital was required to be closed down on account of the violent attack and destruction of the hospital in the year 2001. The Tribunal held that the closure was beyond the control of the hospital management and, therefore, the demand made by the workmen and the reference were not sustainable. As regards the contention that the closure was in violation of Section 25-O and N of Chapter VB of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Tribunal gave a finding that the Union had failed to prove that any manufacturing process was going on in the hospital. The Tribunal further gave a finding that there was no question of reopening the hospital and that it was not possible to grant the relief for revoking the closure notice dated 30 October 2001 and allowing the workers to report for duty.
