1 MSS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 3991 OF 2008 ANIL RAMCHANDRA VADIYAR & ORS. PETITIONERS VS. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS, PUNE & ANR. .. RESPONDENTS Mr. M. S. Topkar for petitioners Mrs. M. P. Thakur, AGP for R-1 & 2 CORAM:SMT.RANJANA DESAI & J. P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE: 15/1/2009 P.C. . Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties taken up for hearing forthwith. 2. The petitioners are employees working in Kolhapur Municipal Transport which is a Transport undertaking of Kolhapur Municipal Corporation, incorporated under Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 ("BPMC Act" for short). It is the case of the petitioners that the Kolhapur Municipal Transport employees are represented by Municipal Transport Workers’ Union, ("the said Union" for short) which is registered under the 2 Trade Unions Act, 1926. The said Union has its constitution duly certified by the authorities under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. Rule 3 of the said Constitution provides that any worker of Kolhapur Municipal Transport shall be entitled to become a member of said Union on paying entrance fee of Rs.1/- and monthly subscription of Rs.5/-. 3. The case of the petitioners inter alia is that the said Union is unauthorizedly and illegally collecting Rs.10/- per member as monthly subscription when the same was Rs.5/- as prescribed in the Constitution; that there had been no election of office bearers after 2001, when it was mandatory to hold elections after every three years and that the said union was acting totally against the interest of the employee-members. 4. Under Section 28A(1) of the Trade Unions Act, 1926, a dispute could be referred to the Tribunal with the consent of the Registrar. The said section reads as under: . "28-A. Power of Industrial Court to decide Power of Industrial Court to decide Power of Industrial Court to decide certain disputes. certain disputes. certain disputes.-(1) Where there is a dispute as respects whether or not any person is an office 3 bearer or member of a registered Trade Union (including any dispute relating to wrongful expulsion of any such office-bearer or member), or where there is any dispute relating to the property (including the account books) of any registered Trade Union, any member or such registered Trade Union for a period of not less than six months, may, with the consent of Registrar and in such manner as may be prescribed, refer the dispute to the Industrial Court constituted under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, (Bom. XI of 1947) for decision." 5. The form of application under Section 28-1A is provided under Bombay Trade Unions Regulations 1927 ("the said Regulations" for convenience). Regulation 23 thereof is material. It reads thus; . "23. Manner of referring dispute to Industrial Manner of referring dispute to Industrial Manner of referring dispute to Industrial Court under section 28-1A. Court under section 28-1A. Court under section 28-1A.-(1) Any person desiring to obtain the consent of the Registrar under sub-section (1) of section 28-1A for the purpose of referring a dispute to the Industrial Court under that sub-section shall make an application to the Registrar in Form "K". 4 . (2) On receipt of the application under sub-rule (1), the Registrar shall make such inquiries as he may deem fit; and if he is satisfied that any dispute of the nature referred to in sub-section (1) of section 28-1A exists he may give his consent in Form "L", called the consent certificate. . (3) On receipt of the consent certificate under sub-rule (2), the applicant shall then refer the dispute to the Industrial Court in Form "M" and enclose therewith the consent certificate in original. 6. In the light of the above provisions, the petitioners made an application under Section 28-A(1) in form "K" stating their grievance and paying that the dispute be referred to the Industrial Tribunal. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 2/4/07 passed by the 1st respondent rejecting the said application on the ground that to the application submitted in Form K under Section 28A(1) of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 the petitioners have not annexed the copies of receipts for the period of six months preceding the date of application indicating that they had paid subscriptions for the membership of the said union. 5 7. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners at some length. He submitted that Section 28A(1) does not require that receipts of subscription should be annexed to the application submitted in Form K. He submitted that the said Regulations also do not contain any such requirement and, therefore, the 1st respondent erred in rejecting the application. 8. Learned counsel further submitted that the subscription was deducted from the salaries of the members and the salary slips are available with the petitioners. He pointed out that the petitioners have addressed a representation to the 1st respondent stating that the receipts were not being issued to the members by the said Union but the subscriptions were deducted from their salaries. Xerox copies of the salary slips were annexed to the said regulation. Learned counsel submitted that the 1st respondent has not considered the said representation till date. 9. We have also heard learned AGP Mrs. Thakur. We have perused the affidavit in reply filed by Shri Ravindra M. Pardeshi, Assistant Commissioner 6 of Labour and Deputy Registrar of Trade Unions. 10. In the circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the 1st respondent should consider the petitioners’ representation which is annexed to the petition at Exhibit-D. 11. Learned AGP Mrs. Thakur states that the said representation will be considered within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order by the 1st respondent and result thereof will be communicated to the petitioners. This statement is accepted. 12. In view of the above the petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE