R.N. Sahay, J.

The petitioner is a registered trade union affiliated to INTUC this application relates to dispute between two groups of the Union which culminated in passing of the order impugned dated 14.2.1994 contained in Annexure 1 by the Registrar of trade Union.

2. The only legal question that arises for consideration is as to whether the direction of the Registrar trade union (Annexure 1) is without jurisdiction or he was competent to issue such direction in exercise of his powers under the Trade Union Act.

3. The petitioners case is that the Union is recognised Union of Indo Asahi Glass Company Ltd. Since last 20 years. The president of the Union was Shri Damodar Pandey. The Union has its own constitution and according to Clause 15 of the constitution the general meeting of the Union is to be held in the month of June every year to elect office bearers and other member of the executive Committee.

4. The President of the Union decided that election for 1993-94 of the Union will be held on 6.6.1993. The Management clotted Community Hall for the purpose. The election was held was per the schedule. On 7.6.63, the president of the union in his capacity as General Secretary of INTUC informed the Vice President (Works) of the Indo Asahi Glass Co. that in the election held the person mentioned in his letter (Annexure -3) have been elected as office by the Management. It is the petitioners case that after the election the Management the elected office bearers of the Union held discussion on various demands of the workmen and also complained to the Management on 26.7.1993 about the violation of the various labour lows by the Management. Copy of the demand was also sent to the deputy labor Commissioner Hazaribagh.

5. On 30.7.93 the Deputy Labour Commissioner Haaribagh wrote to the Vice President works of the Company drawing his attention with regard to the complaint made by the Union General Secretary Sri Sudhir Kumar Varma. The Management was asked to reply with regard to the complaint. The problem was discussed on several dates with no results.

6. It appears that on 20.6.93 the officer incharge of Bhadai Nagar Police Station filed two reports before the sub-divisional Officer Ramgarh for initiation of proceedings under section 107 and 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against Shri Uma Bachan Tiwary (respondent no. 7) who was claiming himself to be the General Secretary of the Union and 14 other. It was stated in the report that the Union was actively working under shri Damodar Pandey. Ex M.P. on 4.6.93 sri Chandra Shekhar Dubey affirmed a rival Union under his President-ship. The police reported that office bearers were elected on 6.6.93 in which Sudhir Kumar Verma was elected as General Secretary. The other Group lead by Sri Dubey declared Dubey to be the President and respondents no. 7 Uma Bachan Tiwary as General Secretary. The report was completely in favour of the petitionrs Union and that is way the police recommended for action only against the separate group formed by respondents 6 & 7. The officer incharde of Bhadai Nagar Police Station considering the gravity of the situation recommended promulgation of prohibitory orders under section 144 Cr. P.C. against both the parties. The Petitioner has alleged that function led by respondent no. 7 aimed as disturbing industrial peace and harmony. They even tried to result the executive of the Management but due to the intervention of the security the attempt was foiled.

7. According to the counter affidavit filed by respondent no. 7 a meeting of the Executive Committee was held on 8.4.93 pursuant to direction of Sri Damodar Pandey dated 7.2.93 calling upon Sri Santosh Kumar Secretary to held fresh election. It was decided to held the election on 4.6.93 another meeting of the Executive Committee of the Union was held wherein the name of 6th respondent Chandrs Shekar Dubey was proposed for the post of president by the member of the Executive Committee. Thereafter on 4.6.93 a