Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Nei Labour Union vs State Of Raj And Ors on 23 August, 2018
Bench: Chief Justice, G R Moolchandani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 774/2018
Nei Labour Union Through Its General Secretary, Bila
Ram Gurjar Son Of Shri Narayan Lal Gurjar, C/o
Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh, 42, Patel Colony, Sardar Patel
Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary,
Department Of Labour And Industries,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Additional Registrar Of Trade Union Cum Regional
Joint Labour Commissioner, Jaipur Region, Jaipur
Raj.
3. Labour Commissioner, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Shanti
Nagar, Khatipura Road, Jaipur.
4. Nei Industries Ltd., Khatipura Road, Jaipur
Through Factory Manager.
5. Nei Shramik Sangh Jaipur Through Secretary
Kailash Choudhary, 370, Guru Jambeshwar
Nagar, Queens Road, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Sogarwal, Adv.
For : Mr. Padam Singh Gurjar, Adv.
Respondent(s) Mr. M.K. Kaushik, Adv.
Mr. P.S. Sharma, Adv.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G R MOOLCHANDANI Order 23/08/2018
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2 of 4) [SAW-774/2018] 2. The fight is between two Unions. The issue is:
which is the Union of the employees of Nei Industries Limited which has to be recognised as representative of the workmen.
3. The labour Commissioner directed vide order dated 12.03.2015 to resolve the issue by a secret ballot. The same has been set-aside by the learned Single Judge
4. Nei Shrimak Sangh claimed that 1483 noticees were its members and before the Commissioner submitted affidavits of 1373 employees. Nei Labour Union claimed Membership of 819 persons. Influenced by the rival claims the labour Commissioner directed secret ballot to ascertain the Membership of the respective Unions.
5. The learned Single Judge has faulted the decision noting the fact that the record of the employer showed that Nei Shrimak Sangh had submitted a list of 1430 persons as its members with a request that the contribution to the Union be deducted from the salary of the said workman and deposited in the account of the Union. The learned Single Judge has found that said 1430 employees did not raise any objections to the contribution made to the Union after deduction from their salaries and paid to Nei Sharmik Sangh.
6. Rule 2C of the Rajasthan Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958 reads as under:-
"R.2C.(1) For ascertaining the membership of unions for the purposes of section 9E, 9F, 9G or 9H, the Registrar shall hold an inquiry in the manner hereafter provided.
(2) The Registrar shall fix a date for holding an inquiry to ascertain such membership and shall give fifteen day's notice thereof to the union or unions concerned.
(3 of 4) [SAW-774/2018] (3) On receipt of such notice, every such union may submit its objections, if any, to the Registrar in writing in duplicate and shall also produce before the Registrar, the following documents:-
(a) Membership Register;
(b) Counterfoils of receipts of subscription for three calendar months immediately preceding the calendar month, in which the application is made;
(c) Minute Books;
(d) Cash Book;
(e) Bank Pass Book, if any;
(f) An audited statement of membership for each of the three calendar months, immediately preceding the calendar months, in which the application is made.
(g) Such other documents as the Registrar may, from time to time direct during the course of an inquiry. (4) Every such objection shall be accompanied by a deposit of Rs. 5/-.
(5) Where the union, to whom notice has been given under sub-rule (2), fails to be present before the Registrar on the date fixed for the inquiry or fails to produce the documents, as required by sub-rule (3), then:-
(a) If such union is an applicant, the Registrar may dismiss the application and
(b) If such union is not an applicant the Registrar may proceed with the inquiry ex parte:
Provided that on sufficient cause being shown by the union, whose application has been dismissed, the Registrar may set aside the order of dismissal and fix a date for holding the inquiry.
(6) The documents produced at the inquiry, by the union shall be opened to inspection to other unions, who may be party to the inquiry, for a period of ten days from the date of their production or for such other period as the Registrar may allow. (7) The Registrar may adopt such sampling method as he may deem fit in verifying the membership register of union.
(8) Where in respect of objections raised against the membership of a union the number of witnesses to be examined is very large, the Registrar may, examine such number of witnesses as he may determine, by adopting such sampling method as the Registrar may deem fit. The Registrar may, with the consent of the parties, examine the witnesses in camera.
(4 of 4) [SAW-774/2018] (9) If, in the course of the inquiry, the Registrar comes to a conclusion that an objection raised against the membership of the union was frivolous or vexatious, he may impose a fine not exceeding Rs.
5/- for every such objection. "
7. Suffice it to state that the Rule does not contemplate the resolution of the dispute by a ballot. A perusal of the various clauses of the Rule would show that the relevant documents to resolve the disputes are those mentioned in clause (3) of the Rule and keeping in view the material on record i.e. deduction of the contributions from the salary of the employees and deposit of the same in the account of Nei Shramik Sangh, we find no infirmity in the impugned order.
8. The writ-appeal is dismissed.
(G R MOOLCHANDANI),J (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ N.Gandhi/Aks/48 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)