Gujarat High Court
Gujarat vs Gujarat on 29 January, 2010
Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt
Bench: S.R.Brahmbhatt
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/549/2010 2/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR DIRECTION No. 549 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5171 of 2008
=========================================================
GUJARAT
VIDHYUT KARMACHARI UTKARSH MANDAL & 2 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD. & 6 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
TR MISHRA for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3.
MS LILU K BHAYA for Respondent(s) : 1 -
6.
- for Respondent(s) :
7,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
Date
: 29/01/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1). Shri D.M. Devnani, learned advocate was permitted to make submissions though the party, to whom he represents namely Akhil Gujarat Vidhyut Kamdar Sangh is yet not on record of the main matter or on the civil application, but he submitted that this union is representing workmen of all the seven establishments of the company and, therefore, he be heard. Accordingly, he was granted audience. He submitted that he opposes the prayer of secret ballot system because it is likely to affect the interest of the union.
2).
Ms. Bhaya learned advocate appearing for respondent nos.1 to 6 also submitted that the process of granting recognition on behalf of the check-off- system is just and proper and it is not required to be by way of secret ballot. The main matter is not on the same aspect and, therefore, the civil application itself is not maintainable. Ms. Bhaya submitted that, therefore, civil application is required to be rejected. Ms. Bhaya further submitted that the petitioners-applicants have not joined other union operating in this industry and, therefore, they are the necessary party. In absence thereof, there would not be proper adjudication of the controversy involved in the matter. The conciliation proceedings are going on and, therefore, in view of this also no relief could be granted at this stage.
3). This court is of the view that the objections raised by Ms. Bhaya could be taken care of by the following direction while disposing of the civil application. Before issuing the direction, it would be important to note that this court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Thaker J.) on 4.2.2009 passed the following order.
Mr. Mishra learned advocate for the petitioner nos. 1,2 and 3 stipulates and clarifies that in view of the fact that the decision regarding representative character of the unions in the respondent undertaking for present period is already over and, that, therefore the relief prayed for in para 6(B) to (D) are not pressed. He further stipulates and clarifies that it is only for the future period that present petition and the grievance made therein is restricted, so as to allay any other doubt, he also clarifies that the present petition is restricted to the following relief only.
Writ, order or direction, directing respondents to determine the representative character of the union operating in the respondents establishment through secret ballots and that too for the future period only.
Hence, Rule, so far as the aforesaid prayer is concerned.
3). Accordingly, Ms. Bhaya's submissions with regard to Civil Application's maintainability would not be acceptable as the prayer which has been articulately stated by this court would survive and on the strength of that prayer and on the basic principles that controversy requires adjudication, this petition came to be admitted.
4). The fact of pendency of conciliation proceedings also would be of some avail only at the time of final hearing of the matter. At this stage, Mr. Mishra, learned advocate for the petitioners submits that no conciliation proceedings as such are pending. Be that as it may. The following direction which court proposes to pass would be no harmful to the parties and in fact it would be open to the respective parties to implead themselves by appropriate application. The civil application is disposed of with a direction that the process of recognition as announced under the notification dated 29.12.2009 would be subject to final outcome of the petition and no finality would be attached to the process if it is completed prior to final decision in this main matter being SCA No. 5171 of 2008.
5). Civil Application stands disposed of. Main matter, at the request of parties, is fixed for final disposal on 16th February,2010.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,J.) Vahid Top