1. Meaning of Intern

An intern is generally a person who works with an organisation for a limited period to gain practical knowledge, professional exposure, and workplace experience. Internships may be undertaken by students, recent graduates, or persons seeking practical training in a particular field.

An intern may work in a law firm, company, government department, NGO, hospital, educational institution, or other organisation.

The legal status of an intern depends upon the actual nature of the relationship, the terms of the internship, applicable legislation, and the duties performed.

2. Internship vs Employment

An important distinction is between an internship for training and an employment relationship.

However, simply calling someone an “intern” does not automatically determine their legal status. Courts and authorities may examine the real substance of the relationship.

3. Nature of Internship

Internships can broadly include:

A. Educational Internship

A student undertakes practical training as part of an academic programme.

B. Professional Internship

A graduate or professional trainee works with an organisation to acquire practical experience.

C. Paid Internship

The intern receives a stipend or other monetary payment.

D. Unpaid Internship

The intern receives training or experience without monetary remuneration, subject to applicable law and the particular arrangement.

E. Vocational/Apprenticeship-Type Training

Where the arrangement is actually one of apprenticeship or statutory training, specialised legislation may apply rather than ordinary employment principles.

4. Legal Status of an Intern

The legal status of an intern depends on factors such as:

• Nature of duties;
• Whether the primary purpose is training;
• Degree of supervision;
• Duration of the arrangement;
• Payment/stipend;
• Whether the person is replacing a regular employee;
• Whether the person is integrated into the organisation;
• Existence of an employment contract;
• Applicable statutory provisions.

Therefore, an organisation cannot necessarily avoid employment-related obligations simply by describing a worker as an “intern.”

5. Intern and Minimum Wages

Whether minimum-wage legislation applies depends upon whether the intern legally qualifies as an employee/workman/person covered by the relevant legislation and upon the nature of the arrangement.

A genuine educational or training arrangement may be treated differently from an arrangement where the individual performs ordinary productive work under an employer's control.

6. Intern and Employee Benefits

An intern does not automatically receive every benefit available to regular employees.

Depending upon the applicable law and actual relationship, questions can arise regarding:

• Minimum wages;
• Provident fund;
• Employees' State Insurance;
• Gratuity;
• Leave;
• Working hours;
• Maternity benefits;
• Workplace safety;
• Prevention of sexual harassment;
• Social-security benefits.

The answer must be determined under the relevant statute and facts rather than merely by the title "intern."

Important Case Laws

1. Dharangadhara Chemical Works Ltd. v. State of Saurashtra (1957)

The Supreme Court discussed the importance of control and supervision in determining whether a relationship of employment exists.

The Court explained that the relationship between employer and employee involves consideration of factors such as the employer's right of control and supervision.

Principle: The real relationship between the parties is important when determining whether a person is an employee.

Relevance to interns: Merely labelling a person an "intern" does not conclusively determine the legal relationship if the actual arrangement resembles employment.

2. Silver Jubilee Tailoring House v. Chief Inspector of Shops and Establishments (1974)

The Supreme Court considered the determination of an employer-employee relationship and emphasised that control and supervision are relevant but not necessarily the only considerations.

The Court recognised that the nature of the work and the overall relationship between the parties must also be considered.

Principle: Employment status must be determined by examining the substance of the relationship rather than relying on a single factor.

3. Hussainbhai, Calicut v. Alath Factory Thezhilali Union (1978)

The Supreme Court adopted a broader approach to identifying the real employer in situations involving contractual or intermediary arrangements.

The Court focused on the economic reality and the ultimate control over the work.

Principle: Courts may look beyond contractual labels and intermediaries to determine the real nature of an employment relationship.

Relevance to interns: An organisation cannot necessarily avoid employment obligations merely through contractual terminology if the actual arrangement demonstrates an employment relationship.

4. Workmen of Nilgiri Coop. Marketing Society Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu (2004)

The Supreme Court examined the question of determining employer-employee relationships and stressed that there is no single universal test applicable to every case.

Various factors may need to be considered, including control, supervision, integration and the surrounding circumstances.

Principle: The determination of employment status requires examination of the totality of circumstances.

5. Balwant Rai Saluja v. Air India Ltd. (2014)

The Supreme Court considered the question of determining who can be regarded as an employee in the context of contractual labour.

The Court discussed the importance of factors such as control, supervision and the nature of the contractual relationship.

Principle: Courts examine the substance of the relationship and the degree of control exercised over the individual rather than relying solely upon contractual terminology.

6. Ram Singh v. Union Territory, Chandigarh (2004)

The Supreme Court considered various factors relevant to determining whether a person is an employee.

The Court referred to considerations including:

• Who has the power to select;
• Who pays remuneration;
• Who has the power of dismissal;
• Who controls and supervises the work;
• The nature of employment.

Principle: Employment status is determined through a combination of relevant factors rather than one isolated test.

7. Indian Banks' Association v. Workmen of Syndicate Bank (2001)

The Supreme Court considered the nature of employment relationships and statutory protections in the banking context.

The judgment demonstrates that the character of a person's work and the applicable statutory framework must be examined to determine the rights available to that person.

Principle: Employment rights depend upon the actual statutory and factual character of the relationship.

7. Interns and POSH Law

Interns can also raise issues under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

The definition of "employee" under the Act is broad and includes persons working in a workplace on a regular, temporary, ad hoc or daily-wage basis, directly or through an agent, contractor or similar arrangement.

Consequently, organisations should not assume that interns can simply be excluded from workplace-protection mechanisms.

Organisations should provide interns with a safe working environment and appropriate mechanisms for reporting workplace harassment.

8. Interns and Confidentiality

Interns may receive access to:

• Client information;
• Company records;
• Trade secrets;
• Personal data;
• Legal documents;
• Business strategies;
• Internal databases.

Therefore, internship agreements commonly contain confidentiality and data-protection obligations.

For example, a law-firm intern handling client files may be required to maintain professional confidentiality.

9. Interns in Law Firms

Law internships are particularly important because interns may:

• Conduct legal research;
• Assist with case-law research;
• Prepare research notes;
• Observe court proceedings;
• Assist in drafting;
• Organise case files;
• Work under supervision of advocates.

However, an intern's activities should be appropriately supervised, particularly where professional responsibility or confidential client information is involved.

10. Internship Agreement

A written internship agreement should ideally specify:

1. Name of intern;
2. Organisation;
3. Internship period;
4. Nature of training;
5. Working arrangements;
6. Stipend, if any;
7. Confidentiality obligations;
8. Intellectual-property provisions;
9. Code of conduct;
10. Termination conditions;
11. Certificate/experience letter, where applicable;
12. Supervisor/mentor details.

11. Important Principle: Substance Over Label

One of the most important legal principles is:

The designation of a person is not necessarily decisive; the actual nature of the relationship must be examined.

Thus, an organisation cannot automatically treat someone as an intern merely because an internship letter uses that term.

If the person is effectively functioning as a regular employee—with continuing productive duties, employer control, supervision and other characteristics of employment—the applicable employment legislation may become relevant.

Conclusion

An intern is generally a person engaged primarily for practical training and professional learning for a limited period. Genuine internships are distinct from ordinary employment, but the legal status of an individual depends on the substance of the relationship, actual duties, control and supervision, payment arrangement, and applicable legislation.

The decisions in Dharangadhara Chemical Works, Silver Jubilee Tailoring House, Hussainbhai, Workmen of Nilgiri Cooperative Marketing Society, Balwant Rai Saluja, and Ram Singh illustrate the broader judicial approach that employment status should be determined by examining the actual relationship rather than relying solely upon labels or contractual terminology.