Karnataka High Court
M. U. Venkatesha Simha Bhovi vs The President on 21 August, 2018
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF AUGUST, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.33642/2018 (GM-RES)
&
WRIT PETITION NO.36472/2018
BETWEEN:
1. M.U. Venkatesha Simha Bhovi
Son of late Muniswamappa
Aged 58 years
Resident of No.1570/3,
Ground Floor
4th Main, Kengeri Satellite town
Bangalore-560 060.
2. G. Venkatesh Bhovi
Son of late Gurrappa
Aged 58 years
Resident of No.36, Jaraganahalli
J.P. Nagara Post
Bangalore-560 070.
...Petitioners
(By Sri. Harish Ganapathy, Adv.,)
AND:
1. The President
Karnataka Union of
Working Journalist (Regd.,)
3rd Floor, Kandaya Bhavan
Kempegowda Road
2
Bangalore-560 009.
2. The General Secretary
Karnataka Union of Working
Journalist (Regd.,)
3rd Floor, Kandaya Bhavan
Kempegowda Road
Bangalore-560 009.
3. The Vice-President
Karnataka Union of
Working Journalist (Regd.,)
3rd Floor, Kandaya Bhavan
Kempegowda Road
Bangalore-560 009.
4. The Secretary
Karnataka Union of
Working Journalist (Regd.,)
3rd Floor, Kandaya Bhavan
Kempegowda Road
Bangalore-560 009.
5. The Treasurer
Karnataka Union of
Working Journalist (Regd.,)
3rd Floor, Kandaya Bhavan
Kempegowda Road
Bangalore-560 009.
6. The Election Officer
Karnataka Union of
Working Journalist (Regd.,)
3rd Floor, Kandaya Bhavan
Kempegowda Road
Bangalore-560 009.
7. The Principal Secretary
Department of Labour
Government of Karnataka
3
4th Floor, Vikasa Soudha
Bangalore-560 001.
8. The Labour Commissioner
Department of Labour
Karmika bhavana
Dairy circle
Bangalore-56 029.
9. The Assistant Labour Commissioner
Division IV
Karmikara Bhavana
Bhannerghatta Road
Bangalore-560 029. ...Respondents
(By Sri. K. Raghavendra, Adv., for C/R1
Sri. M.A. Subramani, HCGP., for R2 to R9)
These writ petitions are filed under articles 226 &
227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the
Election Officer for the period of 2018-2021 to the
Karnataka Union of Working Journalist (Regd.) dated
24.07.2018 produced at Annexure-U and etc.,
These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary
Hearing this day, the court made the following:
ORDER
Though, matters is listed for Preliminary Hearing, by consent of learned Advocates, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. Petitioners have sought for the election result held for the Karnataka Union of Working Journalist 4 (Regd.) dated 24.07.2018 (Annexure-U) for the period 2018-2021 being set aside and for a further direction to the Labour Commissioner to hold and conduct the election in accordance with law.
3. The grievance of the petitioners is they had filed nomination for the post of President and State General Secretary to the elections being held for the Karnataka Union of Working Journalist (Regd.) (for short 'Union') for the period 2018 to 2021 and nomination papers were scrutinized by the Election Officer of the Union and without assigning any proper reason has been rejected and one Sri N. Raju has been declared to be unanimously elected. It is also alleged that reason assigned by respondent No.6 while rejecting nomination of the petitioners is on the ground that petitioners are not the members of the State Working Committee, though they are the members of the Indian Federation of Working Journalist - New Delhi which is affiliated to the Indian Federation of Working Journalist and as such, rejection of their nomination paper is 5 illegal. Highlighting the irregularities and illegalities that was committed, petitioners are said to have submitted representation to respondent No.9 on 16.7.2018 (Annexure-S) pursuant to which, notice has been issued to the Union calling for the reply and even before an enquiry was conducted, the Election Officer has rejected the nominations of the petitioners and declared the results of the Union by declaring that Sri N. Raju and other office bearers as indicated in Annexure-U as having been duly elected unopposed. As such, the petitioners have sought for quashing of the same.
4. There is no dispute to the fact in exercise of the powers vested under Section 6 of the Indian Trade Union Act, 1926, the Karnataka Model Election Rules of Trade Union have been published which is unknown and called as Karnataka Trade Unions Election (Model) Rules, 1953 and Rule 42 provides for redressal of the grievance of the petitioners and similarly placed persons and it reads:
6
"Any question arising out of, in connection with or incidental to the election at any stage, shall be referred to a committee consisting of six persons with the Assistant Commissioner of Labour as Chairman, and the decision of such committee in all such matters shall be final. The six members constituting the committee shall be nominated by the existing executive committee of the Trade Union."
5. A bare reading of above Rule would indicate that all questions arising out of in connection with or incidental to the election at any stage, shall be referred to a committee consisting of six persons with the Assistant Commissioner of Labour as Chairman, and the decision of such committee would be final in such matters.
6. In the instant case, the cause of action for the petitioners to have redressal of their grievances is two folds viz., in the first instant, there has been alleged irregularity perpetrated by the Union and the second cause of action is declaration of results to the Union unanimously. Insofar as first cause of action is 7 concerned, the petitioners have already approached respondent No.9 by submitting representation on 16.7.2018 (Annexure-S) pursuant to which respondent No.9 has issued notice dated 18.7.2018 (Annexure-T) to the Union and has called for the explanation. However, before enquiry or scrutiny of the representation of the petitioners came to be examined by respondent No.9, the results of the Union have been declared as per Annexure-U on 24.7.2018.
7. In that view of the matter, it would suffice, if liberty is granted to the petitioners to furnish additional representation to respondent No.9 highlighting the alleged irregularities/illegalities in the election of Union held for the year 2018-2021 as being contrary to the Model Rules, 1953 and in the event of such representation being submitted by the petitioners within ten days from today, 9th respondent shall expeditiously consider the same at any date within six weeks thereafter by affording opportunities to all the parties/ concerned.
8
8. It is needless to state, the said representation dated 16.7.2018 (Annexure-S) already submitted by the petitioners shall also be considered, examined and adjudicated by 9th respondent along with afresh representation that may be submitted by petitioners within the time frame stipulated hereinabove.
Ordered accordingly.
SD/-
JUDGE BS/SSD