INDRAPARSTHA GAS LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner M/s Indraparstha Gas Limited (CNG) Sharmil Sangh (Regd.)is stated to be a registered trade union of persons working at various CNG stations owned and operated by M/s Indraparstha Gas Limited ( respondent No. 2 herein ). The list of members of the petitioner union is annexed as Annexure 'b' to the petition which contains names of 136 persons. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 2 and respondents No. 3 to 12 not to dismiss the members of the petitioner union as per list annexed as annexure 'b' from their employment till the disposal of IDs No 66/2003 and 99/2003. The petitioner union has also prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari against W. P. (C) No. 9614/2009 Page 1 of 4 the respondents quashing order of dismissal and/or action of changing of service conditions of its members till the disposal of IDs No 66/2003 and 99/2003.

(2.) MR. Harvinder Singh learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2 has taken a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the present writ petition stating that the Court cannot grant blanket injunction order against any employer restraining it from taking disciplinary action against the delinquent workman in a case where some industrial dispute relating to general demands raised by the union is pending adjudication before the industrial adjudicator. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2 that right of the workmen is adequately protected by Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which according to him contains a comprehensive procedure to be followed by the management in a case where some industrial dispute raised by the union is pending on the date it want to take some action against the delinquent workman.

(3.) PER contra, Mr. A. K. Sakhuja learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that respondent No. 2 is not recognizing the members of the petitioner union as its employees and therefore, accordingly to him, the members of the petitioner union will have no protection as provided in Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2 says that none of the members of the petitioner union is an employee of respondent No. 2 and according to him, all the members of the petitioner union are the contract labours employed at various CNG W. P. (C)No. 9614/2009 Page 2 of 4 stations by respondents No. 3 to 12.