•ltij...r;;±:^ '» -CfSr-~'C)~S~-~£i-0 e> & HiGHCOURTOF JUDiCATURE CHHArTiSBARH : BiLASPUR SiNGLE BENCH : HON'BLESHRiS.R. NAYAK, C.J. WR1T PETSTiON N0.2431 OF 200S PETiTiONER s: E^.Sa'Wi Vs 4. 5. iharat AJuminium Mazdobr Union Registered under the T.G.Act. Recognized Union of Balco. Through its General Secretary V. Sharma, S/o Late P.R. Sharma, aged 52 years, Occupation Service R/o. 398/B/3 Balconagar, Korba. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretar^', Department of Labour, Mantrafaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raspur (C.G.) Registrar, Trade Union, Chhattisgarh, Office of the Labour Commissipner, Awanti Vihar, Raipur(C-G.) Assistant I-abour Commissioner, Korba, Distt. Korba. sALCO Karmaohari Sangh, throuah it's Generai Secretery, Rajendra Mishra, R/'o. Seetor 6, Baiconagar, Distt. Korba. Bharat Alumlnlum Company Limited. A company incorporated uncier Companies Act, 1956 fhrough it's Managing Director, Salconagar, Korba, Distt. Koroa. i.R. Dugga, Registrar Trade union, Chhattisgarh, Office of the Labour Commissioner, Sector 1, Awanti Vihar, Raipur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION N0.4137 OF 200! .flf BALCO Karmachari Sangh (Affiiiated to ihartiya Mazdoor Sangh), a Union reaisfered Under Trade Unions Act having it's Head Office at Balconaflar, Korba bearing Regjsfratjon No. 1735/74, Affln. No. 193/MP/78, through Ite General Secretery, Rsjendra Mishra, S/o. Lrfe Shri P.Pl. Mishra, agsd: 50 yeare, R/o Qtr. No. 511/B, Sector-3,|P.O: Batconagar, Korba, .Dist; , Korba (Chhattisgarh) i c State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Labour, Mantrataya, Dau Kafyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G-) Registrar, Trade Unions, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Sharat Aluminlum Mazdoor Sangh; a Union registered Trads Union Act, Baiconagar, through fts General Secretary V. Sharma, S/o Lt. PR Sharma, R/o. Qtr. 398/B/3, Balconagar, District Korba (Clihattisgarh). Sharat Aiuminium Co. Ltd. A Company Incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 through its Managing Dirsctor, Balconagar, Korba, (Chhattlsgarh). Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Bharat Alumjnium Mazdoor Sangh. Shri Utkarsh Verma, learned Deputy Govemmsnt Advocate for the State of Chhattisgarh. Shri Manindra Shrivastava, tearned Senior Counsei with Shri Amrito Das, tearned counssl for respondent—BALCO ' Karmachari Sangh. Shri Abhishek Sinha, learned coynsei for respondent- Sharat Aluminium Company Limited. ORALORDER (Passed on 08/02/2006) iharat Aluminium Mazdoor Sangh is the petitioner in Writ Petition No.2431/2005and it Is a Trade Urtion registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 (for short 'ths Act'). Admittedly, as on today, the ^petitiorier - tAszdoor Sangh is a recognized Trade Union in Bharat Aiuminium Company Limited which is an industry. BALCO Karmachari Sangh, the fourth respondent in Writ Petltjon No.2431/2005 and the petiSioner in Writ Petition No.4137/2005 whteh ts armajority Union in the flfth respondent - Company in Wrlt Retitlon No.2431/2005, made an application on 5-4-2004 before the Registrar, Trade Union, Ghhattisgarh, Kta 'H"'^ ;1-!|8 W9 IB ililll PRt; ^SK: €. the second respondent herein, with a reqyest to recognize it as a recognfeed Union for the purpose of coftective bargaming in the fifth rsspondent - industry. On the basis of that appiication fiied by BALCO Karmachari Sangh, the second respondent - Registrar of Trade Untons, issued notice on 30-5-2005 to the petitjoner - Unton. At that stage, the petitioner - Union preferred Writ Petition No.2431/2005 under ArticSes 3/227 of the Constituiion of India. BALCO Karmachari Sangh had also fited Writ Petition No,4137/2005 for quashing the certificate of recognition dated 12-4-2004 issued bythe Registrar, Trade Union, infavour ofBharat Alummium Mazdoor Sangh and forrestrajning fhat Union from acfing and funeftoning as a representative Unlon ;n She fifth respondent - industry under the provlstons of tle Maa'hya Pradesh inciustrta! Reiations Act, 1960. Both these writ petitions were ciubbed, heard together and they are being disposed of by Uiis common order. . (2) I have heard tearned counsei for the parties. it contended By learned counsel appearlng for the petltioner - Bharat Aiuminium Ma^door San.gh that after the formation of the new State of Chhattisgarh and bifureation of Bilaspur District into Bilaspur District and Korba Districti the petitioner had made application to the second respondent for recognizing it as a coltective bargaining agent in tha flfth respondenf - industry and having considered the said appiication, the second respondent issued certificate of recognition envisaged under sub- iectfon (2) of Section 13 of the M.P. industria! Relations Acf, 1960|on 12- 4-2004 and, therefore, the present Impugned action of the second respondent in entertaining the appiication fiied by the fourth respondent in Writ Petition' No.2431/2005 and issuing notioe on that to the petitis>ner— 1 i;i 4 y Union on 30-S-2005 is ex fac/e unauthorized, iiiegal and violative of the mandate of the proviso to sub-Section (1) of Sectjon 17 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrlai Relations Act, 1960. Par Contra, Shrl Manindra Shrivastava, iearned Senlor Counsei appearing for the BALCO Karmachari Sangh, the fourth respondent In Writ Petition No.2431/2005, would point out that the certificate of recognition was <n fact granted to the petitioner - Union by the seeond respondent as far back ason 10-10-1974 and, thsretQra, the provisions of the firsi proviso to sub-Section (1) of Section 17oTthe Madhya Pradesh Industriai Act, 1960 Is not attracted. Shri Manindra Shrivastava, iearned Senior Gounse! wouid also contend Shat the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh industriai Relations Act, 1960 do not envlsage/contempiate tssuance of certtficate of recognition periodically. ' (3$ It i's not disputed before me that the petitioner - Bharat Alumlnium Mazdoor Sangh was granted certifjcate of recognltion under the provislons of sub-Sectlon (2$ of Sectlon 13 of the Madhya Pradesh Industriaf Relations Act, 1960 on 10-10-1974. It is not the case of the petitioner that the certificate of recognition was subsequently cancelled or vrtthdrawn and, therefore, it hadlo apply forfresh recognition either before or after the new State of Chhattisgarh was formed or earlier District BiEaspur was bifurcated into Bilaspur District and Korba District. if that is the ^ctual position and since the provisions of She Madhya Pradesh industria! Relations Act, 1960 do not envisage or contempiate the issuance of recognltlon certlficate periodicaily, simpiy because, unnecessarily the petitioner - Union in Writ Petition No.2431/2005 had applied for reoognition certificate and the same was issued agnih by thc \." Registrar on 12-4-2004, that fact itself wouid not aiter the position in Igw. The prescribed period of two years had expired iong long back before the fourth respondent - Union tn Writ Petltlon No.2431/2005 made an applteation under Section 17 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1980 to recognize the Union for the purposeof collective hargaining agent in the fifth respondent - Industry. Be that as it may, it is weli settled by a catena of deoisions of the Apex Court that the High Court shail not inrerfere with the statutory show cause notice unless it is shown that the show-cause notice was issued by an incompetent and unauthorized aythority. Therefore, the power of the Registrar - second respondent to intertain the applicafion of the 4 respondent - Union and issue show- cause nottae under Section 17(1) of the Madhya Pradesh indystrsai Relations Act, 1960 cannot be questioned, (4) In the resuit, both the writ petitions ars dismissed. The petltioner - Bharat Aiuminlum Mazdoor Sangh is granted four weeKs' time tQ fi!e jts objectlon to the show cau-se notice issued by the second respondent and on receipt of the objections, if fried, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the applioation of the petitioner Bharat Aluminium Mazdoor Sangh, in'accordance with iaw, after giving fair opportunityto both the sides to representUieirrespsctivecase. Nocosts. Sd/- Chief Justfce Judge