R L VERMA Vs. TATA WORKERS UNION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant brought a suit for declaration that the meeting of the Executive Committee of the Tata Workers' Union held on the 29th April, 1961, and the vote of no confidence passed on the plaintiff, who was then Deputy President of that Union, were void, illegal, ultra vires and not binding upon the plaintiff. He asked for an injunction restraining the defendants, namely, the Union, the other office bearers and the members of the Executive Committee, from interfering with the discharge of his duties as Deputy President of the Union. Alternatively, he also asked for damages from the defendants. The suit was decreed by the trial court, but on appeal by the defendants, it was reversed, Hence, the plaintiff has come in second appeal to this Court.

(2.) The plaintiff's grievance was that a proper notice according to the constitution of the Union for holding the Executive Committee meeting on the 29th April, 1981, had not been given to all the members. The constitution provides a notice of such meeting to be given clear 48 hours before the tune scheduled for the meeting. Learned counsel contended that the service of such, notice on each and every member of the Executive Committee must be before 48 hours before the time of holding the meeting. This contention is wholly unacceptable, because the relevant provision in the constitution is as follows:--

(3.) The next point urged by learned counsel was that no confidence motion was no part of the agenda, and as such, it could not have been moved in the Executive Committee meeting. The rule quoted above shows that any member of the Executive Committee willing to move any resolution on any item of the agenda circulated shall submit a notice of such resolution clear 24 hours before the time liked for the meeting. In the present case, one Sahdeo Khan had given nut ice of the no confidence motion against the plaintiff on the 27th of April, 1961. Learned counsel's further argument was that this should have been notified to each and every member of the Executive Committee also by the General Secretary. There is no provision in the rules or the constitution of the Workers' Union that such further notice of the amendment would be given to each and every member. The very fact that it was open to a member to give notice of an amendment or a resolution on any item of the agenda only 24 hours before the time of the meeting clearly indicates that it was not intended to be circulated to all the members. We were told that the Executive Committee itself consists of 180 members. It is inconceivable that within 24 hours preceding the meeting any notice could be circulated to such a large body.