The Registrar of Trade Unions cannot cancel the registration of a trade union under Section 10(b) of the Trade Unions Act without satisfying the conditions specified in the provision. Co-option of executive members in accordance with the union's constitution does not violate Section 6(h) of the Act.

( 1 ) THE appeal and the stay application are directed against the order, dated 2 March, 1988, passed by his Lordship Justice Sri Suhas Chandra Sen dismissing the writ application of the appellants. Briefly the case of the appellants writ petitioners is as under:

( 2 ) THE appellant 1 is a trade union of workers of the company, Philips India, Ltd. , (now known as Pieco Electronics and Electricals, Ltd.), at Calcutta, and the said appellant 2 is the president of the factory unit of the said union. The Philips Workers' Union was registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, some 33 years back after framing a constitution and rules as required under the said Act, the registered number being 3086. The mode and manner of the election of the members of the central executive committee have been provided under Rule 8 of the constitution as required by Section 6 (h) of the Trade Unions Act. There are two branches of the union, namely, factory unit and commercial unit, and for transacting the business there are two executive committees, one each for the factory unit and the commercial unit. It is stated in the petition that the union has a long heritage of political neutrality but recently one Sri Sunil Ghosh and his associates of the factory unit had been campaigning for the affiliation of the union to CITU. The election of the executive committee of the factory unit was held in 1986 for the year 1986-87. The appellant 2 and his associates did not put up any candidate against Sri Sunil Ghosh and Sri Pradip Mukherjee who filed nominations for the posts of secretary and treasurer respectively, but before the polling date which was fixed on 29 April, 1986, Sri Ghosh and Sri Mukherjee and some of their followers withdrew their candidatures on 22 April, 1986. All other candidates were elected uncontested but due to the aforesaid withdrawal the posts of secretary and treasurer and some members remained vacant even after the election. The newly elected executive committee after obtaining legal opinion filled up by co-option all the vacant posts at the general meeting of members of the factory unit held on 15 September, 1986, where 730 out of 1200 members of the factory unit were present. Thereafter the executive committee of the factory unit submitted a charter of demands to the management of Philips India, Ltd. , for increase of pay and allowances to workmen and this angered the faction led by Sri Ghosh. Ultimately the executive committee succeeded in persuading the management to accept most of its demand and this infuriated the opposite camp very much.

( 3 ) ON or about 6 March, 1987 the appellant 2 received a Memo No. 215/tur, dated 2 March, 1987, from the Deputy Registrar of Trade Unions, West Bengal, respondent 2, regarding affiliation of the rules and constitution of Philips Workers' Union. The said memo, inter alia, stated as under:"from a perusal of the joint representation, dated 2 and 7 January, 1987, from some members of your union it appears as below: (1) That in violation of Clause (9) of the rules and constitution of your union you co-opted executives in the posts of secretary and treasurer. (2) That in the last union election held on 29 April 1986, more than two-thirds of the posts of the executive members from the Salt Lake Factory remained vacant. (3) That the 32nd annual general meeting held on 15 September 1986, was not convened by the duly elected secretary as alleged by the workmen's representation, dated 3 December 1986, addressed to the president. (4) That the annual general meeting of the year 1986 was not held according to the rules and constitution of the union. "this memo also referred to a registered letter sent to appellant 2 being Memo No. 99/tur, dated 20 January 1987, by which appellant 2 was asked to appear before Sri R. N. Mitra. Inspector of Trade Unions, on 31 January 1987, at 11. 30 a. m. for a discussion which was not complied with. Respondent 2 asked appellant 2 to appear before the said Inspe