Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
8. In his cross-examination, WW 1 has denied the suggestion that the PTI Employees Union had not issued the receipts of subscription to its members. He has deposed that the union had the subscription at the rate of Rs. 120/- per annum from 370 employees for the year 2002. He has denied the suggestion that none of the member has paid the subscription to the union since the year of 2002. He has denied the suggestion that the management has not provided the place to any union and that documents relied upon by him are procured and fabricated documents. He has denied the suggestion that there is no place for the notice board. WW 1, in his cross-examination, has deposed that the notice board, on which the union used to place its notices has been broken down on 5.4.2003 and the union made the police complaint, which is under investigation. He has denied the suggestion that they did not make any police complaint for breaking down the notice board. He has deposed in his cross-examination that the decision to raise the present dispute has been taken by the Executive Committee of the union and about more than 200 workers gave in writing to raise the present dispute. He has deposed that there are about 410-420 workers working in the PTI, Delhi and more than 350 workers are members of their union. He has denied the suggestion that about 300 workers resigned from their union. He has denied the suggestion that the union has raised the present dispute as he has been dismissed by the management. He has admitted that he has been removed by the management. He has denied the suggestion that there is a federation for controlling the union and dealing with the management. He has denied the suggestion that the recognized union of the management is PTI Workers Union. WW 1 has deposed further that after management's refusal to allow the union to hold the meeting the union room at the basement of PTI Building, the union held a meeting on 19.04.2003 at the Jantar Mantar and passed the Resolution espousing the present dispute, which is Ex. WW 1/33. He has deposed that the minutes of the meeting of the union executive held on 19.04.2003 were duly recorded in the meeting register of the relevant period but the register is not traceable as it, along with other important union documents, was vandalized and taken away for destroying by the management, about which complaint to the police was filed by him on 09.12.2004, which is also already exhibited as Ex. WW 1/11. He has denied the suggestion that neither such meeting at Jantar Mantar was held nor any minutes of meeting were recorded.