(1) MR Hegde, the learned counsel for the petitioner, attempted to assail the judgment of the division bench of the Bombay High court on two grounds, namely, (1 that it is based on a decision of this court wherein the view taken by this court on the interpretation of S. 10 to 13 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is not correct and requires reconsideration by this bench, and (2 that notwithstanding the view taken in the said decision, the cancellation of recognition is not correct as there was in fact no mistake at all, in that, the procedure of ballot was adopted after ensuring that the workmen, who voted at the ballot had put in service of not less than six months. We do not see any merit in either of these two contentions.

(2) SECTION 11 of the Act provides for making an application for recognition of a union. It says that any union which has for the whole of the period of six calendar months immediately preceding the calendar month in which it so applies under this section, a membership of not less than thirty per cent of the total number of employees employed in