$33” 1 E § ¥’ maxi C(wm‘ m‘cHHAwxsGARH-giLAsmR ' ‘z; § wnt ?etitian No. 2953 of 2004 ‘L i , r i i s 6 P innonar , Shlv Kumar M1shra SIG Late Shn . Jagdmh Drasad M1shra aged 52 yum, ‘ ‘ Mahamanm of Nauonal Sponge Workers ‘ Umor R/o Pends House M ssmn Road ' ‘ Chan”: pa D1smut Jmjgr-Champa (CG) Vsrsus > §esp9nd€nt& ‘ " ' 1. Presidexlt ' Industrial wuitn ‘ § ‘ Chhattbgarh Ralpur(CG) 2. ‘ Registrar‘ Trada Uuions Raip‘urfCG}. ~ » anjav Kumar $mgh Sjo Ramashlav , Pmsad Smgh, Rm PIL Co1ony, Prakqsh _ ‘ ' Indusmes Ltd Lha‘mpa Dmtnct ¥ Jaujgir—Cha’mpa (CG). O) z“ E ‘ ‘ 5 SB Hon’ble Mr. Satish K. Ag“Ihotri J. ' g r S1311 $ P Kae counsel ior the petmoaer ' ‘ r Qhm Aehlsh Shnvastava, Lemme} for the respondent I ‘JO a . GRAL GREER {Passed on this 28th day oi August, 20083 ‘ § The'petiticnerrcha}3enges the order' daieé. $442004 (Annexure% PI u) passed by the Indus’mai Court Ralyiux heldmg that the mmm a1? of the respondent No u m 1\o Ceniideace Monori held on 26 6 2000x was not proVed and further Whethex The Registral. Trade Unwns hast v‘ power to aypomt the observe: 1n the selr c’mon oi the office beaiers of s a Trade Union. 2} 1" Respondent N03 was ’eieeted to the nest of Mahasachm (General Secretary) of Vaaonal sponge Woxkers Umon Champa m‘ ' the wear 2006 ami thereafter elections for the post of omce bems a N\ ‘ mcludmg iv’iahasachlv (Ueneral Secretal) have held 1n the years 200w ‘ y ) , 22 1987(Supp33cc 93 ' . V > r ‘ s (1995) 2 soc. 161 ; { quegtion haS b€com€, acmieimc. Thus, 1t 1s riot necmsary to ¢ 9 ’ aéijudicats on the issue iii absexlcs of any reliaii ‘ 4} Bé that’at it may, it is frite law that if a cause has become. V , ‘ mfmctuoua on the facts of thf: case anti the quéstion invol‘r‘éd is Only, i I , far ) aca6.em1c mttrest 1i 1s, thcmfom, nat necessary to examme the r . ,i dase (Ewe Basheshar Nam vs Commzsswner 0f fncome-tax, Semi and Rafasthcm and anotherl Dhampakar Madan La? Agrawd v3 Rajw Gwdhr Secreiary Minisim 0f Infaimium & browcastma Gaut of India and others v9 (wckea Assaamticm of Benaal and oihers3 Sime of I Mampur and othw‘: vs Chammm Mamhar Smgh4 Amzi Das vs Staie‘ of Blha75 and Prams}: Smah Eadai and anoiher vs Siaie oj Purjabv and others“) I I 5} V Ii 1s W611 acttlsd pmmyie of law that tht: quesnon oi law‘ on ‘ academic iinteresi cannot be adjud1cated upoa, the same should be 16ft open for adjudicatiOIi, whenevm" the: appmpnate Aaci's ar13g '6) In View of the fdregoing, thisgpatitio’n‘ stan§s (iismisse&. r NO ‘ ‘ 7 order asto costs. F ’d/- / S f‘ Sau’sh K. Agnihotri Judge ' ‘ 1 AER 1959 Sc 149 \ i "' '. 4(29993 7 sac 503 ‘ a I v ‘ g E. ‘ s§200u7 SCC657 . . , g v l 612007; L scc 1 and 2G06. Nawth€ riie ’sou‘ghi 0}: by the’, yeti€i0xiér 33 1oecoi3e mfructuous ‘jiil Lcarimd counsel §ecks adjudmation on mi: quesuérl asto Whether :he Ragmtrar, Trade Umons has power to apyamt ths obsaver m the eiecuon 0i the 0iEce ’mamrs, of a Hark: Umou 'Ihe x éf f £ i