A dismissed employee is not entitled to be a member of a Trade Union, registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926.

Brijesh Kumar, C.J.—

The brief controversy in this case revolves around the question as to whether a dismissed employee can be a member/office bearer a of the respondent Trade Union, registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), or not ? The learned Single Judge decided the question in the affirmative, that is, the dismissal would not disentitle him to be a member of the Trade Union. Hence, this appeal, against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 17.11.95, passed in Civil Rule No. 2329 of 1994.

2. We have heard Shri NM Lahiri, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri LP Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The writ petition was filed by Bokajan Cement Corporation Employees' Union, Bokajan, through Shri Pratap Bora, General Secretary of the Trade Union, registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. It appears that the dispute arose relating to elections of the office bearers of the petitioner Trade Union. The Assistant Labour Commissioner prepared a list of members of the petitioner Trade Union for the purposes of Annual General Meeting and the elections scheduled to be held on 24.6.94 and 26.6.94. He deleted the names of 102 contract labourers from the list as well as that of Pratap Bora, who was elected as General Secretary of the petitioner Trade Union in the previous election. Quashing of the list as prepared excluding the aforesaid members was prayed for in the writ petition. It was also prayed that a direction be issued for inclusion of the names of 103 persons in the list of members. The learned Single Judge considering the matter at length, quashed the list prepared by the Assistant Labour Commissioner and further directed him to prepare a fresh membership list. So far Pratap Bora is concerned, it has been held that the order of dismissal of Pratap Bora being under challenge in the proceeding before Labour Court, he cannot be considered to be an outsider. We need not go into the other facts in detail regarding dispute between the rival factions, etc, as that would not be necessary for the purpose of settling down the controversy involved in the appeal.

4. The learned Single Judge made it clear in the order that, save and except the right of Pratap Bora, rights of other members of the Trade Union have not been decided; which are to be decided by the proper authority while preparing the list of members. In this view of the matter, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is not aggrieved by that part of the order; but the grievance is only in respect of Pratap Bora, who is no more in employment and is a dismissed employee, yet to be considered and treated as a member of the Trade Union.

5. The main thrust of the argument is on the point that since Pratap Bora is no more in employment of the industry, he would not be entitled to be a member of the Trade Union. In this connection, our attention has been drawn to the constitution of the Trade Union and the provisions regarding its membership. Clause 5 deals with membership of the Trade Union. It reads as follows:

"5. Membership: Any worker employed by the Cement Corporation of India directly or indirectly throughout shall be eligible for the membership of the Union provided he/she accepts the constitution, bye laws and discipline of the Union and pays the stipulated admission fee of Rs. 100 along with stipulated subscription. Clause 6 relates to the Executive Committee, which reads as under :

“6. Executive Committee: The administration of the Union shall be vested in the Executive Committee selected at its Annual General Meeting from amongst the members of the Union which shall consist of 17 to 21 members including the under noted officials." (Emphasis supplied)

6. According to the constitution of the trade union, one who is employed by the Cement Corporation of India directly or indirectly would be eligible for membership of the Union. The emphasis laid on behalf of the appellant is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document