The Naval Dockyard at Visakhapatnam has two categories of persons who render service. The first category is the industrial workers and the other is the civilian employees. The petitioner is one of the trade unions of the Naval civilian employees. It was also recognized by the management.

2. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’) provides for appointment of Works Committee (for short ‘the Committee’), that would comprise of members of the workmen and members of the management, almost in equal number. The procedure for formation of Works Committee is prescribed in part VII of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957 (for short ‘the Rules’).

3. As required under Rule 41 of the Rules, the petitioner and other unions were requested to furnish the particulars of their membership through letter, dated 06.08.2009. In response to the same, the petitioner submitted a reply dated, 31.08.2009, stating that its membership is 3395. Its members are distributed among the various sections, shops and departments of Naval Dockyard. Similar particulars were furnished by the other unions also.

4. The fourth respondent i.e., Chairman and Returning Officer of the Election Committee of the Dockyard issued proceedings, dated 07.09.2009, declaring the election programme and dividing the electorate into ten constituencies. According to the programme, the process was to commence on 22.09.2009 and end on 08.10.2009. This writ petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in proposing to conduct elections. The grievance of the petitioner is that the facts of the case do not allow the division of electorate into ten constituencies, as proposed.

5. The petitioner contends that its membership is 50% of the total strength of the workmen and as per Rule 42 of the Rules, division into constituencies becomes permissible only when a particular union does not have more than half of the workmen as its members. It is also urged that in case there is any doubt as to the membership of the petitioner, the only course open to the respondents is to seek adjudication of the same before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour (for short ‘the Commissioner’) as provided for under Rule 42 of the Rules. It is further urged that the division into electoral constituencies under Rule 43 of the Rules can be done only where the division contemplated under Rule 42 is permissible.

6. On behalf of the respondents, a counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that the Naval Dockyard, Visakhapatnam has a workforce of about 6000 industrial workers and there are two registered trade unions for them including the petitioner. Another unregistered union is also said to be existing. According to the respondents, the membership of the petitioner union was not renewed after 2007-2008 and no subscription towards membership was recovered from the wages of the workers. The necessity to refer the matter to the Commissioner would arise if only there is any dispute as to the actual membership. The respondents further contended that the elections are being held strictly in accordance with the relevant provisions of law in the interests of the workmen and that the petitioner cannot be permitted to stall the same.

7. Sri P.B.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that constitution of the Committee is an important step intended for the welfare of workmen and that the Government framed the Rules, touching on the subject covering various aspects. Learned Counsel further submits that the petitioner has not only mentioned the percentage of the total workmen as its members, but also furnished the list of names and if there exists any doubt as to the accuracy of the particulars, the only alternative is to refer the matter for decision to the Commissioner. The learned counsel also submits that the division of the electorate into various constituencies, as provided for under Rule 43 of the Rules, would become permissible, if only a major classification thereo