This petition challenges an order passed by the Industrial Court at Thane on a complaint of unfair labour practices under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions And Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (“Act”). The impugned order allows the Respondent's complaint and sets aside orders of transfer issued to six concerned workmen on 3 April 2017. The impugned order is challenged only on the ground of want of locus on the part of the Respondent union to represent the case of individual employees of the Petitioner company.

2. On 3 April 2017, the Petitioners transferred six security guards employed by them. These transfer orders were challenged before the Industrial Court at Thane by the Respondent union under Section 28 read with Item Nos.3 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Act. The Petitioners challenged the locusstandi of the Respondent union on the ground that it was not a union within the meaning of Section 3(17) read with Section 22 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The Industrial Court by its impugned order rejected the Petitioners' objection on the ground of locusstandi of the complainant union and quashed the transfer orders by allowing the complaint. That order, as noted above, is challenged only on the ground of the Respondent not fulfilling the character of “union” within the meaning of Section 3(17) of the Act.

3. The submission of learned Counsel for the Petitioners is that under Section 3(17) of the Act, “union” means a trade union of employees, which is registered under the Trade Unions Act. Learned Counsel submits that a trade union can be registered under the Trade Unions Act subject to certain conditions, such as minimum requirement about membership of the trade union under Section 9A of that Act and proportionate number of office bearers to be connected with the particular industry under Section 22 of that Act. Learned Counsel submits that a registered trade union is required to have, at all times, not less than ten per cent or one hundred of workmen, whichever is less, subject to a minimum of seven, engaged or employed in the establishment or industry, with which it is connected, as its members. Learned Counsel also submits that not less than one half of the total number of office bearers of every registered Trade Union in an unrecognised sector shall be persons actually engaged or employed in the industry with which the trade union is connected, and save as otherwise provided under subsection (1) of Section 22, all office bearers of a registered trade union, save and except not more than one third of the total number of the office bearers or five, whichever is less, shall be persons actually engaged or employed in the establishment or industry with which the trade union is connected. Learned Counsel submits that in the present case not only was the union not formed by the workmen employed with the Petitioners but that the application for registration was not made on behalf of any of the Petitioners' workmen and neither the minimum number of required members nor the proportion of office bearers are from the Petitioners' industry. Learned Counsel, in the premises, submits that the Respondent does not fulfill representative character of a union within the meaning of the Act and cannot espouse the cause of employees with whom we are concerned in the present complaint.

4. The right of the union to appear and act in proceedings relating to unfair labour practices concerning employees of an industry is recognized by the Act. The Act defines “union” in Section 3(17) to mean a trade union of employees, which is registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. Trade Unions Act, in turn, defines “trade union” under Section 2(h) thereof to mean any combination, whether temporary or permanent, formed primarily for the purpose of regulating relations between workmen and employers or between workmen and workmen, or between employers and employers, or for imposing restrictive conditions on the conduct of any trade or business, a