BHARTIYA KAMGAR SENA Vs. OWENS BROCKWAY (INDIA) LTD. AND NATIONAL KAMGAR UNION, SUKH SAMRUDHI HOUSING SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is filed for registration of the Applicant Union as a recognized Union in M/s. Owens Brockway (India) Ltd., Pune -18. The Applicant Union i.e. Bhartiya Kamgar Sena is a duly registered Union under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 on 8th August, 1968 and is issued the registration certificate No. 6142 by the Registrar of Trade Unions, Mumbai. The Applicant Union has contended that during the whole of the period of six calendar months immediately preceding the calendar month in which this; application is filed, it had the membership of not less than 30% of the total number of the employees employed in the non -Applicant undertaking i.e. M/s. Owens Brockway (India) Ltd., Pune. In the general meeting of the members of the Applicant Union and in the meeting of the Executive Committee of the said Union held at Mumbai on 18th April, 1998, it was decided that the Application union should apply for registration as a recognized union for the non -Applicant Company. The Applicant union has tendered the prescribed fee of Rs. 5 for this application by way of Court fee stamps. It is contended that the said Union did not instigate, aid or assist the commencement or the continuation of any strike amongst the employees in the undertaking for which the Applicant union seeks the recognition, which is deemed to be illegal under the Act, within the period of six months immediately preceding the date of submission of this application. It is also further contended that the said union has not made any application for registration as a recognized union before any Industrial Court. According to the Applicant union, its member has to pay a monthly subscription of Rs. 3 and the Executive Committee of the Applicant union met on the dates mentioned in para 11 of the Application during the period of 12 months preceding the date of this application. The Applicant union has also maintained the minutes Books in which all the resolutions passed by the Executive Committee of the General Body of the Union are recorded. The books of the accounts are also properly maintained by the Applicant union and they were audited by M/s. R.B. Malik & Company on 21st April, 1998. A certificate of the Auditor is also enclosed. The Applicant union therefore, submits that since it has complied with all the requisite conditions laid down under section 19 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of the Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 ("the Act" hereinafter), the Applicant union be issued a certificate granting the recognition in the undertaking of the non -Applicant company.

(2.) THE non -Applicant company filed the written statement at Exh. C -3 and contended that it has no objection to process the application in accordance with the provisions of the Act and to grant the recognition to the Applicant union. The said company also filed the affidavit of Shri Shinde at Exh. C -2 wherein it is stated that as per the directions of the Court Shri Shinde displayed the notice dated 28th August, 1998 on the notice board in Marathi together with the copies of the application, as required under Regulation 85 of the Industrial Courts' Regulations 1975, on 1st September, 1998.

(3.) THE National Kamgar Union by filing a pursis at Exh. NAU -9 informed this Court that it has also no objection if the Applicant union is recognized for the Non -Applicant undertaking. The Applicant union submitted the affidavit of Shri Subhash G. Chalke at Exh. U -10 in support of the contentions raised in the application for recognition. The Junior Investigating Officer of the Industrial Court, Pune, also submitted his report at Exh. C -7 wherein, it is stated that the requisite formalities required under the Act for recognition are complied with by the Applicant union. Therefore, considering the report of the Junior Investigating Officer, the affidavit of the Applicant Union and the consent given by the non -Applicants for granting the recognition for the Applicant union, I find absolutely no hesitation in holding that the Applicant union is entitled to get the recognition in the non -Applicant undertaking. Hence, I pass the following order.