-^ HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHArTISGARH: BILASPUR Sinule Bench: - Hon'bte Shri S.R, NAYAK, CJ WRIT PETITIQN N0. 5557 OE2005 PETITIONER D.R. Dhurandar, S/o Shri Dayalu Ram Dhurandar, Aged about 55 years, Al! India R.M-S. & M.M.S. Employees Union, M.G. & Group 'D', Raipur, R/o. Near Hanuman Mandir, Urkura Post Office - Birgaon, District Raipur (C.G.). RESPQNDENTS Versus Chief Post K/laster General, Chhattisgarh Cirole, Department of Post,Raipur (C.G.). Bhagwandas Das, S/o Not Known, Aged about 58 years; General Secretary, MSI/22, Atul Grow Road, Eastern Code P.N.T. Quarter, New Delhi -1. S.K. Pawar, Circle Secretary, R.M.S. Rail Dak OfRce, Jabalpur (M.P.). Present: Mr. Anand Kumar Tiwari, leamed counsei for the petitioner. ORDER (Passed on 28"* November 2005) This baslc facts which are germane to the decision - making in this writ petition to be noted first and they are as follows: On account of the Reorganization of temtories which fall under the circles which are now existing in the State of Madhya Pradesh and in the State of Chhattisgarh, the Trade Union namely Atl India R.M.S. & M.M.S. Employees Union, M.G. & Group 'D' Employees which was headed byttie ~2.- -i^Cs MtssaeSSS9"'-"' ||g3S([JSii •^5^ petitioner nameiy Shri D.R. Dhurandar became defunct for want of office bearers. in the circumstance, the second respondent namely Bhagwandas who is the General Secretary of All india R.M.S. Empioyees Union by passing an order dated 18-7-2005 has constituted a three member ad-hoc committee for conducting and managing the affairs of the Union. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India complaining that the oommittee so constituted by the seeond respondent is proceeded to hold the fresh election to elect the office bearers of the Union without authority of the law and in violation of Articls 15-C of bye-laws of the Union. So complaining, the intervention of the Court is sought. 2. have heard Mr. Anand Kumar Tiwari, tearned counsel for the petitioner. A careful perusal of the petition would show that the petitioner is not seeking any relief against the first respondent who is Chief Post Master General, Chhattisgarh Circle. The relief is sought on!y against the second respondent who is Generat Secretary of the subject Union. The dispute brought before the Court, therefore, falls within the domain of inter se dispute between the ofRce bearers of the same Union. All India RMS & MMS Employees Union is not a 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Further more, the petitioner is not seeking writ to enforce any public law obligafon cast on the second respondent or three member ad-hoc committee constituted by him. tn that view of the matter, the writ petition is totally misconceived and not mainteinable. The dispute brought before the Court is essentially civii in nature and that dispute can be threshed out by instituting a suit before the jurisdictional Civil Court. However, it was contended by Mr. A.K. Tiwari that the first respondent has approved the proposal to hold election -">- igg®!8s ryr Subbu' initiated by the second respondent vide order dated 18/07/2005 by his endorsement dated 22/08/2005 and therefore, the writ petition maintainable. The Court pointedly asked the learned counsel whether prlor approval of the first respondent Is necessary to conduct election to elect the office bearers of the trade union in terms of any stetute or provisions of the Constitution, he was not in a position to trace such obligation with reference to any 'staiute or Constitution. Without thers being any legal obligation if the second respondent outside the taw sought approval of the first respondent and the first respondent without appreciating the law requirement, accorded permission, that fact itself would not invest a iocus in the petitioner to move this Court under Article 226 of the Constltution of Indla. In the result, the writ petition is dlsmissed as not mainteinable. However, this order shall not come in the way of the petitioner, if he so advised, to work oirt the legal remedies before the jurisdictional Civil Court or any other forum. There is no order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice