SHRAMIK SENA Vs. BLUE STAR WORKERS UNION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the judgment and order dated 3rd March, 1998 rendered by the Industrial Court, Thane granting the Application (MRTU) No.7 of 1994 filed by respondent no.1 - Union under section 11 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short "the Act") for being registered as recognised Union of the workmen in the factory of respondent no.2 - company at Thane. The petitioners and respondent no.1 are trade unions registered under the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, 1926. Both claim that they represent majority of the workmen in the said Undertaking of respondent no.2.

(2.) The question that falls for our consideration in this writ petition is whether the order of the Industrial Court granting respondent-union s application under section 11 of the Act, for being registered as recognised Union for the Undertaking of respondent-company at Thane, was legal or calls for interference by this Court.

(3.) The factual matrix set out in the petition and which is relevant and necessary for considering the question involved reveals that the respondent-union, registered in June, 1971 under the Trade Unions Act, was functioning for more than two decades in the factory of the respondent-company at Thane. It had not applied for grant of registration as recognised union under section 11 of the Act until January, 1994. The respondent-company at its Thane factory had 234 workmen employed at the relevant time. The respondent-union claims that it had vast majority of workmen as its members when it applied for being recognised union under section 11 of the Act. The Industrial Court considered the lists of both the Unions and by deleting the common names proceeded to consider the application on the basis that the applicant-union had in all 101 members at the time it applied for recognition. It appears that none of them had paid their subscription for the year 1993 till July. The 20 members paid their subscription for the period from January to December, 1993 on 16.7.1993, 7 paid their subscription on 19.10.1993, 46 paid on 25.10.1993, 9 paid on 28/29.10.1993 and 19 paid their subscriptions on 2.11.1993, which made the total of 101. The Industrial Court while reaching the conclusion that the respondent-union had 30 per cent of the employees as its members, excluded 19 members who paid their subscription on 2.11.1993 and 10 others on some other grounds. The 72 employees were held to be sufficient to comply the requirement of 30 per cent of total number of the employees employed in the Undertaking for the whole of six calendar months under section 11 of the Act. The petitioners claim that majority of the employees who were members of the respondent-union, had resigned and joined their union in October 1993 and as a result of which the workmen of the respondent-company were no longer represented by their union.