Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: code of discipline in K.Vel vs Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd on 9 November, 2012Matching Fragments
[***] (2) The employer shall nominate his representatives on the Board of Trustees from amongst the officers employed in managerial or administrative capacity in the establishment.
(3) The representatives of the employees, on the Board of Trustees shall be nominated or elected in the following manner, namely:
(a) wherever there is a union recognised by the employer under the Code of Discipline in industry or under any Act, such union shall nominate the representatives of the employees;
(b) where there are more than one trade union recognised by the employer, the representatives of employees shall be elected by the members of the union in an election to be held for the purpose of any working day;
(c) where there is no union recognised by the employer under the Code of Discipline in industry or under any Act but there are more than one registered union, functioning in the establishment, the union having the largest number of members, subject to a minimum of 15 per cent membership, shall have the right to nominate employees representatives; and in case there is only one registered union, it shall have the right to nominate the employees representative, provided it has a minimum of 15 per cent membership.
5.This court is not inclined to accept the same as it would be a strange interpretation to the regulation in question. As seen from the above, there are only 3 situations contemplated, i.e., the existence of single union recognized either under the Code of Discipline or under any other Act and that union alone shall nominate the representatives of employees. While the Code of Discipline is a non statutory arrangement evolved in the tripartite labour conference of the 15th Labour Conference. In the State of Tamil Nadu, there is no law for grant of recognition to unions. Therefore, if under the Code of Discipline, a union is given recognition, then certainly that union whether it has got 15% or lesser percentage of membership, can have the right to nominate its members to the trust. It is only when there are more than one recognized union by the employer, then the representatives of the employees will be elected from among the members of such unions in an election held for that purpose. In this case, admittedly, an election was conducted on 28.02.2012 for the grant of recognition. Only two unions secured largest number of votes. Thus the petitioner trade union as well as the 4th respondent union came to be recognised as the trade unions in the NLC. Therefore, in the present case, as rightly directed by the third respondent, Regulation 79C(3)(b) alone will apply and not 79C(3)(c).
6.The petitioners pressing into service of paragraph 79C(3) is misconceived, because it is not a case where no union is recognized by the NLC. Only in such a case where no union is recognised, then the union (registered trade union) having membership of 15% will have authority to nominate trustees. It was also stated that under paragraph 79C(9), in case of any dispute, the matter will have to be taken before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and that the decision of the Commissioner shall be binding. The petitioner has not chosen to go before the Commissioner. But on the other hand, he directly came before this court. The reliance placed on paragraph 79C(3)(c) is uncalled for in view of the fact that there are two recognised unions. The method by which recognition was granted to those unions is not under challenge. Certainly, though it is not obligatory, the NLC had conducted a secrete ballot, by which the 4th respondent union was recognised. Therefore it cannot be said that it is not a recognised union. For the grant of recognition by secret ballot, the question of 15% membership is not necessary. As noted already, the Code of Discipline for the grant of recognition is a non statutory Code. Though it was stated that 15% of the workers in the establishment concerned should be the members, but in the present case, deviating from the Code of Discipline, the workers insisted upon secret ballot. Thereafter after conducting the secret ballot, the first two unions were recognised.