Judgment : R. K. MERATHIA, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing letter No. 344 dated December 31, 1997 (Annexure-1) whereby respondent No. 2 directed the petitioner to get itself registered under the Factories Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for violation of the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of the Act and rule 4 of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Rules")and also for quashing Letter No. 73 dated march 16, 1998 (Annexure-4) issued by respondent No. 2 rejecting the petitioners show-cause. According to the petitioner, generator has been installed in the cinema hall which is operated only in case of load shedding or power failure. ( 2 ) IT is submitted that the petitioner is not engaged in the business of generation of electricity by use of generator in such manner and therefore, the petitioner cannot be asked to get itself registered under the Act. Mr. Sen, appearing for the petitioner, relied on a bench decision of this Court in J. L. Mehta and another v. State of Bihar and Another, 2001 (1)East Cr. C. 575 (Pat) and submitted that though the judgment prelates to quashing of a criminal case which was lodged for not registering the premises under the Act inspite of using the generator in the office premises, but the analogy will apply in this case. ( 3 ) MR. H. K. Mehta, appearing for the state, relying on Annexure-A, the notification dated January 12, 1985 issued by the Labour, employment and Training Department submitted that the petitioner has been asked to get it registered in view of Clause 7 of Schedule "y" of the said notification. ( 4 ) THE only question is whether such use by the petitioner is contemplated under the said notification or not. ( 5 ) SECTION 2 (m) of the Act defines "factory" which means any premises including the precincts thereof and in any part of which a manufacturing process is being carried on, or is ordinarily so carried on etc. The said notification has been issued under Section 85 (1)of the Act which gives power to the State government to declare that all or any of the provisions of the Act shall apply to any place wherein a manufacturing process is carried on or is so ordinarily carried on etc. The said notification has been issued under Section 85 (1)of the Act which gives power to the State government to declare that all or any of the provisions of the Act shall apply to any place wherein a manufacturing process is carried on or is so ordinarily carried on etc. ( 6 ) IT is thus clear that where the manufacturing process is carried on or is so ordinarily carried on, is a factory within the meaning of Section 2 (m) of the Act and for such premises, the State Government can issue notification applying the provisions of the Act to such premises. In J. L. Mehta (supra), i generating sets were used in the office. A criminal case was launched for violation of the act and the rules requiring registration of the premises as a factory. It was held that the term "ordinarily" has not been denied in the Act. However, in the context of manufacturing process in a factory means regularly or habitually and not casually whether it be for a larger or smaller portion of the day. It was further held that such mode of manufacturing i process cannot be considered to be carried on ordinarily so as to bring the premises within the definition of factory. It was further observed that it is a common knowledge that due to bad supply position of electricity, generators are used during load shedding. The said findings are relevant in this case and are thus adopted. ( 7 ) IN the circumstances, it has to be held that the said notification dated January 12, 1985 will not apply to the premises of the petitioner where generator is used by it during load shedding. ( 8 ) IN the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed and Annexures-1 and 4 are quashed. However, there will be no order as to costs. --- *** --- .