MATHEW Vs. PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O. P. No. 349/91 is filed by K. C. Mathew, a Junior superintendent working under the first respondent who was also holding the post of General Secretary of the Kerala Plantation Corporation Staff Union affiliated to the I. N. T. U. C. He prays for a declaration that the rules governing officers of the respondent do not prohibit or restrict the petitioner from holding the post in a trade union and that Exts. PI and P3 are illegal and arbitrary. It is the petitioner's claim that ever since he joined the respondent's service and ever since the Plantation Corporation Staff Union affiliated to I. N. T. U. C. was formed in 1970 he happened to be an office bearer of the union and in 1979 as per the settlement between the staff union and the management 30 posts of Junior Superintendents were created or in effect Certain posts were upgraded and he continued to be the General Secretary of the Union from 1981 though working as junior Superintendent. He claims that Ext. PI memo issued to him on 8-3-1990 and the memo dated 6-12-1990 issued to him after Ext. P2 explanation are illegal and arbitrary and they violate the fundamental right of the petitioner under Art. 19 (1) of the Constitution.

(2.) SHRI. M. V. Joseph appearing for the petitioner contends that clause 17 (d) of Ext. RI (a) only prohibits an officer from being a member of a political party or being a member of any organisation which takes part in politics. It does not restrict the right of the petitioner to be a member of a trade union and it does not prohibit the petitioner from being an office bearer of a trade union. If this clause is deemed to prohibit the petitioner participating in the trade union activity and holding the post of an office bearer of the staff union it offends Art. 19 of the Constitution. He also contends that the respondent comes within the ambit of Art. 12 of the constitution. As it is a Government Company and it is an instrumentality of the state, the writ petition is maintainable and any restrictions against the fundamental right under Art. 19 (1) of the Constitution can only be imposed by a statute. The Board of Directors by a resolution, cannot impose any restrictions on the fundamental right envisaged under Art. 19 (1) of the Constitution. Hence exts. P1 and P3 have to be quashed. He also contends that right from 1981 petitioner has been holding the post of General Secretary of the union. Till 1990 there was no objection. Obviously, they are now trying to prevent the petitioner from participating in the trade union activity and being the General secretary. In view of the decisions to hold a referendum Exts. P1 and P3 were issued with ulterior motives. On the ground of want of bonafides also they are liable to be quashed.

(3.) O. P. No. 16255 of 1992 is filed by the General secretary of the Kerala Plantation Staff Association ( a. i. t. u. c.) In this petition, petitioner seeks several reliefs, some of which have become infructuous. The first relief is to call for the records relating to the case and quash resolution No. 4239 in Ext. P4 dated 4-10-1990. The second relief prayed for is to issue a writ of mandamus to direct the management/first respondent to see mat D. S. Menon, R6 and K. C. Mathew, R7 who are now working as junior Superintendents and who are office bearers of different trade unions do not hold the office of in any trade union of employees of the first respondent. The third relief prayed for is to direct the respondent not to conduct the referendum pursuant to Ext. P4 resolution. 4 and 5 are the residuary prayers which are consequent to the first three prayers. Now, in this case as the referendum has already been held on 15-12-1992 prayer 3 has become infructuous, so also prayer 1 has become infructuous. The only prayer that survives in this writ petition is prayer No. 2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner mat junior superintendents who are working in the supervisory cadre and in the managerial cadre are not entitled to participate in trade union activities of trade unions of which employees of the first respondent are members. Reliance is placed upon cl. 17 (d) of the service rules and the various resolutions passed and the memos issued to K. C. Mathew.