Madras High Court
All India Postal Employees Union vs Government Of India on 4 August, 2025
Author: P.T. Asha
Bench: P.T. Asha
W.P.No.15902 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 04.08.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
W.P.No.15902 of 2023
&
W.M.P.Nos. 15364 to 15367 of 2023
All India Postal Employees Union,
Group – C, Tamil Nadu Circle,
Chennai – 600 002,
Rep. by its Circle Secretary. ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.Government of India,
Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Communications,
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhawn, New Delhi – 110 001.
2.The Director General,
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications,
Government of India,
Dak Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 001.
1/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm )
W.P.No.15902 of 2023
3.The Assistant Director General (Staff Relations Legal),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications,
Government of India,
Dak Bavan, New Delhi – 110 001.
4.The Chief Postmaster General
Tamil Nadu Circle,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of
India for issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records relating to the impugned order vide SR-10/7/2022-SR-DOP
dated 26.04.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the same
insofar as the petitioner is concerned and to consequently direct the
respondents to continue to recognise the petitioner Association to
represent its members in Tamil Nadu Circle and to continue to provide
trade union facilities to the petitioner union in Tamil Nadu Circle and
pass such other order.
2/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm )
W.P.No.15902 of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr. K.M.Ramesh
Senior Counsel
For Mr. V.Subramani
For Respondents : Mr. AR.L.Sundaresan
Additional Solicitor General of
India
Assisted By
Mr. R.Subramanian
Central Government Standing
Counsel
ORDER
The petitioner Union has filed this Writ Petition seeking to challenge the order dated 26.04.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent and consequently direct the respondents to recognise the petitioner Association to represent its members in Tamil Nadu Circle and to continue to provide trade union facilities to the petitioner union.
2. The petitioner Union is affiliated to the All India Postal Employees Union, Group C, which is an apex body recognised by the respondents as the representative body of the Group C employees working in the Postal Department All Over India. This union had 60% 3/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 of the employees as its members which is more than 35% of the total employees in Group C category in the All India Level in the last membership verification held in the year 2017.
3. It is the further contention of the petitioner that under the CCS (RSA Rules) there are three Levels of Service Associations such as Division Level, which is Taluk or District Level, Circle Level which is a State Level and National Level. Each Level consists of separate memberships, elections and recognition accorded by the respondents. At the National Level an accredit Service Association getting majority is recognised as majority union while at the Circle and Divisional Level there are separate procedures to establish majority.
4. Therefore, it is the contention of the petitioner that the National, Circle and Division Levels operates separately right from the membership, check off system, recognition, negotiation etc., The recognition of the Service Association are as per the Rules framed by the Government of India called Central Civil Services (Recognition of 4/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 Service Associations) Rules, 1993 herein after called the RSA Rules.
5. Rule 5 of the RSA Rules provides the condition for recognition of Service Association. One of the main conditions is that the Association must represent a minimum of 35% of the total number of category of employees in the first place and at least 15% membership in the second place.
6. Rule 7 of the RSA Rules provides for the verification of the membership. The verification process is done once in five years as per instructions of the Government of India.
7. Rule 8 of the RSA Rules deals with the withdrawal of recognition. Under this provision if any one of the condition specified therein is not complied with the Government may after giving opportunity to the Service Association to present its case, withdraw the recognition. Therefore, once recognition is granted it cannot be withdrawn without following the principles of natural justice. 5/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023
8. While so, the recognition of apex body was withdrawn on the ground that they had donated to the farmers' agitation and had transferred funds to the political parties like CPI (M) or CITU which acts are in violation of the conditions stipulated in Rule 8. On the de- recognition of the parent body all the central trade unions had requested the Hon'ble Minister for Labour and Employees to reconsider the decision of re-recognising the petitioner Association since the aberration is on the part of the office bearers not backed by the union.
9. Since the parent body had been de-recognised all of a sudden during the last week of April 2023, the respondents had stopped responding to the request of the petitioner Association without giving them any reason and on 26.04.2023 they were issued with an order vide SR-10/7/2023-SR-DOP that the respondents have decided to withdraw with immediate effect the recognition granted to the All India Postal Employees Group C and the National Federation of Post Employees. 6/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023
10. The petitioner is aggrieved by this order in as much as no prior written notice or hearing had been given to the petitioner union. The respondents started withdrawing the status of the recognised union as also the trade union facilities granted to the petitioner union from 27.04.2023 and issued letter calling off the monthly meetings as well as the check of facilities.
11. It is also the contention of the petitioner that the Tamil Nadu circle has been recognised as a separate entity for the purpose of recognition under the respondents. The respondents are therefore estopped from denying recognition of the office bearers of the Tamil Nadu circle. As a result, the petitioner has approached this court to quash the order derecognising the parent body.
12. The respondents have filed a counter stating that the derecognition order had been made on account of the fact that the National Federation of Postal Employees NFPE and its trade union wing as well as the All India Postal Employees Union Group C were 7/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 funding farmers agitation. That apart, they have donated amounts to the Confederation of Central Government Employees and workers to provide help to the farmers movement as well as sums to CPI (M) and CITU, which are political parties. This is in violation of the RSA rules.
13. The respondents would submit that the National Federation of Postal employees were issued with a communication dated 16.03.2023 to explain their position and show cause as to why recognition of their Association as well as Federation should not be withdrawn as per the provisions contained in Rule 8 of the RSA Rules.
14. The respondents would submit that the instant Writ Petition has been filed by the State Level Union which does not have locus standi to challenge the impugned order passed against the National body and therefore the Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed in limini. 8/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023
15. The respondents would submit that the Circle Level and Division Level Associations are only branches of the Central Level Associations. Once the recognition of the Central Level Association is withdrawn it becomes applicable to the Circle and Division Levels as well. The impugned order is against the National body which has not questioned the same (However, it is later informed that the National Body has moved the High Court of Delhi questioning the derecognition).
16. The respondents would further submit that the derecognition has been ordered only after following due process of law. Since the Central Body has been de-recognised the State Level and Division Level Unions cannot exist independently and therefore sought for the dismissal of the Writ Petition.
17. A reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner refuting the contentions set out in the counter affidavit. They would submit that the Central Body has filed the Writ Petition in WP.(C).No.11733 of 2019 9/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 before the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court and the Delhi High Court is seized off the matter.
18. It is brought to the notice of this Court that WP.(C).No.7135 of 2023 was filed before the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi by the Circle Office at Ranchi seeking to set aside the order dated 26.04.2023 in and by which the derecognition of the Central Association had been passed.
19. The learned Judge after extracting the arguments, pleadings, rules and Judgements had observed that out of three transactions set out in the show cause two had been proved against the petitioner which was sufficient to sustain the impugned order. The two transactions were a sum of Rs.50,000/- donated to the CITU and a sum of Rs.4935/- to CPI (M), which are in violation of the provisions of Rule 5 (b), 5 (h) and 6 (c) of the RSA Rules.
10/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023
20. The learned Judge had observed that while exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court does not sit in appeal over the impugned order and the Court is only bound to consider as to whether the principles of natural justice have been followed. The learned Judge also observed that when a recognition of an association is for a period of 5 years, the period of derecognition should also be commensurate. Therefore, the learned Judge while dismissing the Writ Petition had observed that the petitioner Association would apply for fresh recognition and if the petitioner is found otherwise eligible under the Rules the respondent should grant fresh recognition to the petitioner Association.
21. The learned Judge had observed as follows:
“44.As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid findings, there is no doubt that out of the three transactions / allegations made in the show cause notice, two were duly proved against the petitioner which is sufficient to sustain the impugned order.
45.It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “Union of India Vs. ISRO Drivers 11/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 Association” reported in (2020) 8 SCC 657 that the primary object of forming service Association is to promote the common service interest of its members and the membership of the service association remain restricted to such government servants having common interest and all group of employees are categorised as a “distinct category” for forming their association. ..........
47.This Court is of the view that when the recognition was granted for a period of five years, the order of de-recognition cannot extend beyond the expiry of the period of recognition which has already expired. In such circumstances, it would certainly be open to the petitioner to apply for fresh recognition if the petitioner is otherwise found eligible under the Rules of 1993. Grant or denial of fresh recognition would be within the exclusive domain of the respondents who are expected to act in accordance with law.”
22. This order was challenged directly before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C).No.16598/2025 and by order dated 15.07.2025, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had dismissed the Special Leave Petition stating that the petitioner should have challenged the 12/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 order by filing the Writ Appeal before the Division Bench and not the Special Leave Petition, giving them a liberty to avail the appellate remedy.
23. In the light of the detailed Judgement of the Jharkhand High Court where this very relief was sought for, I see no reason to hold otherwise. From a perusal of the records it is clear that the parent body of the petitioner Association has violated certain conditions which gives the respondents the right to invoke the provisions for derecognition. However, as observed by the High Court of Jharkhand when recognition is valid for 5 years derecognition cannot be indefinite.
24. In a batch of Transfer Petitions that had been preferred by the Union of India as writ petitions were pending in four different High Courts, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the petitions for transfer of all those proceeding to the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed that wherever interim orders are passed by the Court the same 13/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 could be continued till the matters are finally decided.
25. In the instant case, the petitioner do not have the benefit of interim order. Therefore, the order passed in Transfer Petitions would not enure to the petitioner Association.
26. Therefore, the Writ Petition while holding that the petitioners are not entitled to the relief claimed by them, liberty is given to the petitioner to apply for fresh recognition. On such application the respondent shall consider the same as per the rules. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
04.08.2025
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
kan
To
1.Government of India,
14/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm )
W.P.No.15902 of 2023
Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts, Dak Bhawn, New Delhi – 110 001.
2.The Director General, Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications, Government of India, Dak Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 001.
3.The Assistant Director General (Staff Relations Legal), Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications, Government of India, Dak Bavan, New Delhi – 110 001.
4.The Chief Postmaster General Tamil Nadu Circle, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
P.T. ASHA, J kan 15/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm ) W.P.No.15902 of 2023 W.P.No.15902 of 2023 04.08.2025 16/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 05:43:12 pm )