Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. The petitioners in W. P. No. 12388/2011 calls in question the very jurisdiction of the Registrar, Trade Unions, Madhya Pradesh in causing an enquiry to ascertain the strength of respective Union for the purpose of its being kept in the list of 'approved Union'. The petitioners in W. P. No. 12362/2011 questions the order on an additional ground that having been governed by the Code of Discipline and recognized as such, taking recourse to a secret Ballot to ascertain the strength of the Unions for the purpose of the approved list, is contrary to the established norms, as well as to the very code of Discipline which acknowledges that it is on actual physical verification that a decision has to be arrived at as to which Union deserves to be the representative Union. In other words, the approved Union would be a Union which draws maximum coverage to represent the large interest of workers.

26. Having thus considered this Court is of the opinion that the Registrar, Trade Unions, Madhya Pradesh had no jurisdiction to invoke the provisions of Chapter IIIA of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 in respect of the industry viz., the mining industry and the cement industry, which are governed by the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The impugned order dated 15-07-2011 is, therefore, liable to be and is hereby quashed.

27. The applicability of code of discipline and W.P. No.12362.11 the procedure prescribed thereunder for determination of the representative Union on the basis of actual physical verification of membership was being submitted during course of hearing; however, since the petitions are confined only to the order dated 15-07-2011 and no other relief has been sought in the petition, the said aspect has not been gone into in the present petition. It is, therefore, for the Unions and the management to decide the mode for determination of a representative Union.