THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.NO.1124 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioner worked as Gang Mazdoor under the control of Superintending Engineer, R & B Circle, Warangal – second respondent and the Executive Engineer, R & B Regular Division, Hanamkonda – third respondent for the period from August, 1991 to 31.03.1994. He questioned the oral termination and raised an industrial dispute under Section 2(A)(ii) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal – first respondent. He authorized President of the union viz. P.M.Vijay to represent him as contemplated under Rule 38 of the Industrial Dispute Rules, 1958. The office of the 1st respondent raised an objection with regard to the petitioner being represented by the office bearer of the union, which he is associated. The petition filed by him came to returned on 23.09.2008 with the following endorsement: “Memo of authorization filed by the representative is rejected with a detailed order on 9.9.2008 and accordingly party is directed to submit the petition either in person or through authorized person. Therefore, the representative cannot make representation again. However, party is at liberty to submit the petition either in person or through authorized person under 36(c) of the I.D. Act, who is connected with the department.” The said endorsement is assailed in the writ petition. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned Government Pleader for Labour takes notice on behalf of the respondent No.1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government pleader. The first respondent returned the papers presented by the petitioner with an endorsement that the authorized person must be connected with the department. Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 deals with representation of parties, which reads as hereunder: 36. Representation of Parties:- (1) A workman who is a party to a dispute shall be entitled to be represented in any proceeding under this Act by- (a) (any member f the executive or other office bearer) of a registered trade union of which he is a member; (b) (any member of the executive or other office bearer) of a federation of trade unions to which the trade union referred to in clause (a) is affiliated; (c) where the worker is not a member of any trade union, by (any member of the executive or other office bearer) of any trade union connected with, or by any other workman employed in, the industry in which the worker is employed an authorized in such manner as may be prescribed. (2) An employer who is a party to a dispute shall be entitled to be represented in any proceeding under this Act by- (a) an officer of an association of employers to which he is a member; (b) an officer of a federation of associations of employers to which the association referred to in clause(a) is affiliated; (c) Where the employer is not a member of any association of employers, by an officer of any association of employers connected with, or by any other employer engaged in the industry in which the employer is engaged and authorized in such manner as may be prescribed. (3) No party to a dispute shall be entitled to be represented by a legal practitioner in any conciliation proceedings under this Act or in any proceedings before a Court. (4) In any proceedings (before a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal), a party to a dispute maybe represented by a legal practitioner with the consent of the other parties to proceeding and (with the leave of the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal as the case maybe.)” The petitioner claims that he is a member of Kakatiya NMR Work Charged Union, R & B Department, Hanmakonda. The person who is authorized is the President of the said Union. If such is the situation, the authorized person comes under Section 36(1)(a). Therefore, the objection raised by the first respondent that the authorized person should be connected with the department cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to entertain the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 2(a)(2) through the authorized person, if it is otherwise in order. ____________ 04.02.2009 Note: cc in a week B/o kvrm THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.NO.1124 OF 2009 DATED: 04.02.2009