Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act allows representation by a member of the executive committee of an association of employers, including legal practitioners.

JUDGMENT:---This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of this Court upholding the respondent No. 1's right to be represented by one C.V. Pavaskar, in References No. 3 of 1999 and 10 of 1999 between appellant and respondent No. 1 company before the Industrial Tribunal. The learned Single Judge has rejected the appellant's contention that the said Pavaskar is not entitled to represent the respondent company because he is a legal practitioner, prohibited from appearing in the dispute by virtue of section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

2. The appellant, which is a registered trade union of employees objected to the appearance of C.V. Pavaskar, admittedly a qualified Advocate and S.V. Mokashi on the ground that they are legal practitioners and consequently not entitled to represent the respondent company. The right of Mokashi to represent the respondent company is no more in dispute and the objection to his appearance has been given up before the Industrial Tribunal itself. The Industrial Tribunal held by its order dated 28th September, 2000 that Pavaskar was not entitled to represent the respondent company. The learned Member of the Tribunal proceeded on the undisputed position that Pavaskar is a member of a federation i.e. the Employers Federation of India and that he intends to represent the respondent company in that capacity. However, observing that Pavaskar is not on the pay roll of any of the member establishments and not an employee of the respondent company either, he was held disentitled to appear in his capacity as a member of the federation.

3. Pavaskar has been authorised by the respondent company in his capacity as a member of Central Executive Committee of the Employers' Federation of India of which the respondent company is a member, vide Exhibit "A". Rule 22 of the Rules and Regulations of the Federation provides that the federation shall be under the control and management of the Executive Committee. A certificate issued by the Secretary General of the Employers' Federation of India certifies that Pavaskar is an office bearer of the Employers' Federation of India by virtue of being a member of the Central Executive Committee of the federation. The certificate further certifies that the respondent company is a member of the federation since 1958; and the federation is registered under the Indian Trade Unions Act, 1926. Pavaskar's entitlement must therefore be considered on these facts. One thing is clear, Pavaskar's appearance in the matter is not that of a legal practitioner qua legal practitioner.

4. Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which provides for representation of parties reads as follows:---

"36. Representation of parties---

(1) A workman who is a party to a dispute shall be entitled to be represented in any proceeding under this Act by---

(a) any member of the executive or other office bearer of a registered trade union of which he is a member;

(b) any member of the executive or other office bearer of a federation of trade unions to which the trade union referred to in Clause (a) is affiliated;

(c) where the worker is not a member of any trade union, by any member of the executive or other office-bearer of any trade union connected with, or by any other workman employed in the industry in which the worker is employed and authorised in such manner as may be prescribed.

(2) An employer who is a party to a dispute shall be entitled to be represented in any proceeding under this Act by---

(a) an officer of an association of employee of which he is a member;

(b) an officer of a federation of associations of employers to which the association referred to in Clause (a) is affiliated;

(c) where the employer is not a member of any association of employers, by an officer of any association of employers connected with, or by any other employer engaged in, the industry in which the employer is engaged and authorised in such manner as may be prescribed.

(3)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document