IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1947 OF 2007 PETITION (L) NO. 1947 OF 2007 PETITION (L) NO. 1947 OF 2007 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1664 OF 2007 PETITION (L) NO. 1664 OF 2007 PETITION (L) NO. 1664 OF 2007 Saraswat Co-operative Bank Employees Union & Anr. ..Petitioners V/s. Rayu Mahambre & Ors. ..Respondents ....... Mr. V.P. Vaidya for the Petitioner in WP 1663/07 and Respondent No.1 to 4 in Petition No.1947/07 Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr.Adv. i/by M.D. Nagle - Petitioner in WP(L) 1947/07 & Respondent No. 1 & 2 in WP 1664/07 Mr. K.M. Naik i/by S.P. Salkar for Respondent No.3. ....... CORAM CORAM CORAM : SHRI J.N.PATEL & : SHRI J.N.PATEL & : SHRI J.N.PATEL & SHRI SHRI SHRI K.K.TATED, JJ. K.K.TATED, JJ. K.K.TATED, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 1ST AUGUST, 2008. : 1ST AUGUST, 2008. : 1ST AUGUST, 2008. P.C.: . These two petitions can be disposed off by the common order at the stage of admission itself. The Petitioners in two petitions have challenged the interim order passed by the learned Member of the Industrial Court in Application (ICTU) 04 of 2007 by an order dated 11.07.2007 below Exh."E". : 2 : 2. The Petitioners in Writ Petition No.1664 of 2007 are aggrieved that they have been dis-lodged from their post to the extent that by interim order, the Industrial Court has directed to hold the fresh election to the Managing Committee by two independent administrators to be appointed amongst members of the union. One name is to be suggested by the applicants and the other by opponent nos.1 and 2 within a period of 8 days from the passing of that order and that these two administrators would work alongwith the Managing Committee of the Union to hold the fresh election of the office bearers as per the provision of the constitution and that they shall call General Body Meeting for declaring the results and that meeting of the Managing Committee to be held within 15 days for deciding the election programme. In the meantime, the treasurer of the union shall maintain the accounts of the union properly and take signatures of the two administrators before expenditure towards approval and the administrators to submit their report to the Court after holding the election on or before 11.9.2007. 3. On the other hand, the Petitioners in Writ Petition (L) No. 1947 of 2007 purported to be filed on behalf of the union taking exception to the interim : 3 : order to the extent that by interim order, the Industrial Court has reinstated the President and three members who have been expelled from the post of the Managing Committee of the said Society by the office bearers of Petitioner No.1 union. 4. On the basis of these facts, the Petitioners in Writ Petition (L) No.1664 of 2007 raised a dispute under Section 28-A (1) of the Trade Unions Act, 1926, after obtaining the Consent Certificate dated 4.4.2006 from the Registrar of Trade Unions. It was the case of the Petitioners that they have been expelled from the post of President and Members of the Managing Committee and the Managing Committee in the same meeting co-opted Mr. Sadashiv Dhere as the President, Mr. Pramod Mashele, Mr. Yashwant Katalkar, Mr. Subha Sawant and Mr. Aminash Nadkarni as the members of the Managing Committee. 5. It is the case of the Petitioners that this was contrary to the constitution and Rules of Union i.e. Saraswat Co-operative Bank Employees Union. The learned Industrial Court found that the Petitioners i.e. original Applicants before the Industrial Court have made out a case in their favour for granting the relief : 4 : sought for by them. 6. The learned Member of the Industrial Court placed reliance on clause 14 of the Constitution and Rules of the Union and reproduced the same in its order which reads as under :- "Any office bearer of the union or a member of its Managing Committee can be removed by the General Meeting of the members by three fourth majority for committing any fraud or having acted against the interests of the union, provided the office bearer or the member to be removed is given adequate opportunity to explain his conduct". 7. There is no dispute over the fact that decision of expulsion / removal of the applicants from their posts as office bearers and nominees of other members in their place was done by the Managing Committee and not by calling the General Body Meeting of the Members of the Union. 8. Therefore, by the impugned order, the decision of the Respondent-Union in so far as relates to removal of the applicants / petitioners is concerned, came to be quashed and set aside as a result of which they too are reinstated as President and Members of the Managing Committee respectively. : 5 : 9. The stand which was taken by the Respondent-Member before the Industrial Court that only resolution was passed to the effect that the applicants are removed from their post of the Managing Committee and called General Body Meeting and the opponent union has decided to call General Body Meeting to take the action against the Applicants and, therefore, the applicants have approached the Court at the pre-mature stage but this was not accepted by the Industrial Court which went on to issue further direction in the matter and in the operative part of the order declared that the Managing Committee and office bearers who are elected on 8.1.2007 to work as office bearers of the Union till fresh office bearers and Managing Committee members are elected. For that purpose two independent administrators are appointed amongst the members of the Union. One name is to be suggested by the Applicant and proceeded to pass following order :- "3. it is hereby declared that the managing committee and office bearers who were elected on 8.1.2007 to work as office bearers of the union till the fresh office bearers and managing committee members are elected, for that purpose two independent administrators are appointed amongst the members of union, one name is to be suggested by the applicants and another name to be suggested by opponent No.1 & 2 within 8 days from today to the court and these two administrators to work with the managing committee of union to hold the fresh election of : 6 : office bearers and managing committee members as per the provisions of the constitution and to call the general body meeting for declaring the results; and administrators and managing committee members, office bearers to call the meeting of managing committee within 15 days from today for deciding the election programme." 10. The Petitioner in Writ Petition (L) No.1947 of 2007 have impugned the interim order as they are aggrieved by the fact that the learned Industrial Court restored the office bearers by declaring that Managing Committee and the office bearers who have been elected on 8.1.2007 to work as office bearers of the union till the fresh office bearer of Managing Committee are elected. 11. Therefore, in the first Petition filed by the Members, who raised a dispute, are aggrieved by the decision of the Industrial Court to the extent that the Industrial Court directed the Union to hold election and the Petitioner union who were the Original non-applicants before the Industrial Court are aggrieved by the Order of Restoration of Membership of the office bearers who were removed in the meeting of the committee. 12. In so far as the findings of the Industrial : 7 : Court on the point that the removal / expulsion of the applicants is not in accordance with provisions of the Constitution of the Union is concerned, in our opinion, it does not call for any interference as the said fact was also not disputed by the applicants i.e. Petitioners Union. The applicants have taken limited stand before the Industrial Court that their expulsion / removal from membership of the Managing Committee is to be taken up in the General Body Meeting of the Members of the union. Therefore, the Petitioners in Writ Petition (L) No.1947 of 2007, now, cannot agitate the issue before this Court as even according to them the decision taken by the Managing Committee is required to be placed before the Members of the union in the General Body Meeting. Prima facie, they accept that there is no compliance of clause 14 of the constitution of Rules of the Union. 13. Therefore, as a result the Petitioner-original Applicants would continue to hold the post that they were holding on being elected as President and Members of the Union till the decision of the Managing Committee is adopted by the General Body Meeting as required under clause 14 of the constitution of the Rules of the Union. : 8 : 14. The second and crucial aspect which requires consideration is as to whether the Industrial Court was justified in directing the Union to call for General Body Meeting for holding the fresh election by directing that the Managing Committee of the union shall hold fresh election of office bearers and Managing Committee Members as per the provisions of the Constitution by calling the General Body Meeting for declaring the result and administrators and managing committee members, office bearers to call the meeting of managing committee within 15 days for deciding the election programme. 15. It is contended on behalf of the Petitioners-original applicants that as per the Constitution the term of the members of the Managing Committee once elected is for a period of 3 years and, therefore, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside. 16. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the opponent union submits that as the Managing Committee has resolved to remove the Petitioners-original applicants from the post of Membership of the Managing Committee on a request by : 9 : majority of members a fresh election of the Managing Committee will be required to be held by calling the General Body Meeting. Therefore, this part of the order does not call for any interference. 17. It is submitted that this Court may appoint an official of the office of Registrar of Trade Union, directing to appoint one of its official to conduct General Body Meeting to elect Members of the Managing Committee. 18. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners-original Applicants in Writ Petition (L) No.1664 of 2007 states that the Petitioners have no objections for calling a General Body Meeting but it should be left to the General Body Meeting, whether they want to hold fresh election to the Managing Committee or ratify the decision of the Managing Committee in accordance with clause 14 of the constitution. 19. Mr. K.M. Naik appearing for the Saraswat Co-operative Bank states that the employer has no role to play in the affairs of the Union and their election and accordingly he has placed his affidavit in reply in the matter. : 10 : 20. In our view, it was not proper on the part of the learned Industrial Court to have directed holding of a General Body Meeting for conducting election of the Managing Committee at the interim stage when their dispute was still pending to be decided on merits and that too without affording the parties before it an opportunity to lead sufficient evidence on record to arrive at such findings. Therefore, it will be appropriate to modify the order passed by the Industrial Court directing holding of General Body Meeting to elect members of the Managing Committee to conduct the fresh election of the Managing Committee by appointing Administrators. 21. We direct the Registrar of Trade Unions that they will nominate one of its official to call a General Body Meeting of the Union :- (i) To ratify or disapprove the decision taken by the Managing Committee. AND / OR : 11 : (ii) To dissolve the Managing Committee and hold fresh election of the Managing Committee of the Union. 22. Once the decision is taken in the General Body Meeting, it is needless to say that whatever decision is taken in the General Body Meeting, the consequences are bound to follow and it may result in the dispute pending before the Industrial Court coming to an end. 23. As per the above terms, both the Petitions are disposed off accordingly. 24. Stand over for four weeks. (J.N. (J.N. (J.N. Patel, J.) Patel, J.) Patel, J.) (K.K. (K.K. (K.K. Tated, J.) Tated, J.) Tated, J.)