IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 2278 of 2007 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.25705/2007 Dated 23/08/2007 .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS: ----------------------------------------- 1. TITANIUM EMPLOYEES UNION (UTUC), KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD.,SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583, QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 2. TITANIUM COMPLEX WORKERS ASSOCIATION, KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD.,SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583,QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 3. KMML TITANIUM COMPLEX EMPLOYEES UNION (UTUC-B), KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD., SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583,QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 4. THE KERALA MINERALS & TITANIUM EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (AITUC), KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD., SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583, QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 5. TITANIUM LABOURS CONGRESS, KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD.,SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583, QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 6. TITANIUM COMPLEX EMPLOYEES UNION (UTUC-M), KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD., SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583, QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.THAMPAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, SHRAMA SHAKTHI BHAVAN, RAFI MARG, NEW DELHI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LABOUR DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE KERALA MINERALS AND METAL LTD., SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583, QUILON, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR. 4. THE CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LABOUR,NEW DELHI. 5. REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), KENDRIYA SHRAM SADAN, OLIMUGHAL, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682 030. 6. KMM TITANIUM EMPLOYEES UNION, KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD., SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583, QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 7. TITANIUM COMPLEX EMPLOYEES CONGRESS, KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD., SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583, QUILON, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R1 & 4 SRI.GEORGE JOSEPH, ADDL.CGSC FOR R1,4 & 5 SRI.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 SRI.P.V.LOHITHAKSHAN FOR R3 SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON FOR R3 SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA FOR R3 SMT.UMA GOPINATH FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K. MEERA FOR R2 DR.K.P.SATHEESAN FOR R.6 SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR FOR R.6 SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD FOR R.6 SRI.N.SUKUMARAN FOR R7 SRI.S.SHYAM FOR R7 SRI.N.K.KARNIS FOR R7 SRI.BOBBYMATHEW KOOTHATTUKULAM FOR R7 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. KOSHY, Ag. CJ. & P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WRIT APPEAL No. 2278 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT KOSHY, AG.CJ, Petitioners are registered trade unions functioning in the third respondent undertaking. In order to avoid plurality of unions, the Management decided to grant recognition to unions after conducting a referendum. It was also decided that only those unions, which secure more than 15% votes of the workmen will be granted recognition and only they will be recognised as the bargaining agents. On the basis of the above, referendum was conducted. Recognition is for a period of four years. Two years are already over. Eight unions are there in the establishment. It is the contention of the petitioners that the recognised unions are representing only below 50% of the work force. Therefore they wanted the management to conduct a fresh referendum and to change the norms for getting recognition. The learned Single Judge held that whether a Union is entitled to be recognised or not itself is an industrial dispute and the petitioner's remedy lies in raising an industrial dispute and no relief can be granted under Article 226 of the Constitution. WA. 2278/2007. 2 2. Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act defines an 'industrial dispute', as per which dispute covers dispute between workmen and management and also workmen and workmen. If the norms of recognition is bad, it is a dispute between management and workmen. If such unions are objecting, it will be a dispute between workmen and workmen. Hence the questions raised here can be agitated in an industrial dispute. 3. We agree with the views of the learned Single Judge. Hence we see no ground to entertain the appeal. The appeal is dismissed. But the unions may approach the Government for making appropriate legislation regarding the formulation of rules relating to recognition of unions as bargaining agents in establishments. J.B. KOSHY, AG. CHIEF JUSTICE P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE WA. 2278/2007. 3 sb.