The 1978 judgement in Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board, by a seven-judges bench of the Supreme Court, is a classic melange of statutory interpretation, constitutional law and public policy concerning industrial relations. The judgement is focused on the interpretation of the expression “industry” under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Unlike the customary practice in judicial decision making, the aforesaid judgement is a peculiar culmination of different opinions drafted and pronounced at different times. Furthermore, the judgement has been widely criticized for judicial over-reach and making the definition of “industry” over-inclusive. Accordingly, the Paper attempts at bringing out the inconsistences in judicial interpretation and points out the primary deficiencies and limitations in Bangalore Water Supply decision, as has also been recognized in several subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court. The Paper highlights the need for predictability and consistency in judicial decision making, especially by the Supreme Court, which has gradually become a ‘sine qua non’ for any matured jurisdiction. The Paper concludes with two interesting modes of evaluation – (1) as evaluated by foreign courts with similar Labour laws and; (2) a Statistical evaluation.