MANAGEMENT OF THE RLY EMPLOYEES CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD Vs. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL RAJASTHAN JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Writ petition on behalf of the Management of the Railway Employees' Co-operative Credit Society (Jodhpur Dn.) Jodhpur (hereinafter called the Society) praying that by a Writ of Prohibition the Industrial Tribunal, Rajasthan, Respondent No. 1) be prohibited from taking any proceeding in Case No. I. T. 2/1959 - Uttariya Railway Mazdoor Union Vs. Northern Railway Co-operative Society, Jodhpur.

(2.) THE facts set out by the petitioner are that the Society was established by the railway employees of the Jodhpur Railway in the year 1920, and after the integration of the Jodhpur Railway with the Northern Railway, the Society was constituted as Railway Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. , Jodhpur Dn. , Jodhpur. This Society was duly registered under the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1953. In that Society Shri Kan Raj Mehta (Respondent No. 2) was working as Head Clerk in the year 1956, while the three Respondents No. 2 to 5 were working as clerks. According to the Society, the activities of these persons were prejudicial and subversive to the efficient working of the Society on account of their: - (a) collectively remaining absent from work from 8. 4. 56 to some days after 28th of April, 1956 i. e. just on the eve of the general meeting when the Balance-Sheet and report were to be submitted before the General Body. (b) instigating and conspiring to paralyse the working of the Society on the eve of the annual General Meeting held on 28. 4. 56. (c) taking active part in distribution of certain leaflets to vilify the management. (d) instigating the depositors to withdraw their deposits from the Society and thus undermining the very existence of the Society.

(3.) RESPONDENTS Nos. 2 to 5 had their disputes with the management of the society. It is urged on behalf of the Union that these respondents acted collectively in placing their representation before the Government of Rajasthan through the Divisional Secretary of the Union and the Union also passed a resolution taking up the cause of respondents Nos. 2 to 5. Thus, respondents No. 2 to 5 were acting in concert and were acting collectively, one adopting the cause of the other to, place their grievances against the management of the society before the Government through the Divisional Secretary of the Union. On the other hand, it is urged on behalf of the petitioner that under the rules of the Union respondents Nos. 2 to 5 could not become the members of the Union and as such their member ship of the Union should not be taken into account. The finding of the Tribunal is that they were in fact members of the Union, and at least this can be said that when the Union passed a resolution on the 15th of June 1957, all the members of the Union took up the cause of respondents Nos. 2 to 5. It may be that the taking up of the cause by the members of the Union who are employees of the Railway is not of much assistance to respondents Nos. 2 to 5 in raising their disputes to the level of industrial dispute but so far as respondents Nos. 2 to 5 themselves are concerned, this resolution is prima facie evidence of the fact that each one took up the cause of the other. According to the allegations set forth in the petition, respondents Nos. 2 to 5 were acting in concert from the beginning and it will be too much to say that when they were making the representation through the Divisional Secretary of the Union, they were acting individually. We are of the opinion that RESPONDENTS Nos. 2 to 5 were each espousing the cause of the other when they made representations to the Rajasthan Government through the Divisional Secretary of the Union.