Back
2017 Supreme(Mad) 3407
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Chennai Petroleum Employees Union [Regn. No. 3046 /CNI] Rep by its General Secretary, Chennai - Petitioner
Versus
The Management of Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited Rep by its Managing Director Manali, Chennai & Another - Respondents
W.P. No. 25849 of 2010 & M.P. No. 1 of 2010
Decided On : 22-11-2017
For the Petitioner: Ramapriya Gopalakrishnan
For the Respondents: Sanjay Mohan, M/s. Ramasubramanian Associates, C.T. Murugappan
The importance of equal opportunity and mutual respect among citizens in the context of union recognition and bargaining rights.
Headnote:
Union Recognition - Freedom of Association - The court held that the formation of a union or association is a fundamental right under the Constitution of India, and the management must invite all unions with considerable membership for negotiations and settlements. The court emphasized the importance of equal opportunity and rejected the claim for sole bargaining agent status, stating that monopoly cannot be considered the best policy in a democratic country.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought recognition as the sole bargaining agent for confirmed workers of the respondent company.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition, stating that the relief sought was against the basic principles enunciated in the Constitution, emphasizing the importance of equal opportunity and mutual respect among citizens.
Issues: Recognition of sole bargaining agent status for the petitioner union.
Ratio Decidendi: The formation of a union or association is a fundamental right, and the management must invite all unions with considerable membership for negotiations and settlements. Monopoly cannot be considered the best policy in a democratic country.
Final Decision: The writ petition stands dismissed, and there is no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the first respondent management to forthwith accord recognition to the petitioner union as the sole bargaining agent of the confirmed workers of the respondent company.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the petitioner union is the major union in the respondent management and they must be declared as the sole bargaining agent.
3. Forming of an Union or association by a group of citizen is a fundamental right enshrined under the Constitution of India. Freedom of forming an association by the citizen in accordance with law cannot be questioned. So also if there are more than one union and if the respondent management is of the opinion that such unions are having considerable number of members, then it is for the authority competent to take a decision, which all are the unions to be invited for negotiations and for settlement in accordance with law.
4. India, being progressive and a country of vibrant democracy, no union can claim that they must be declared as a sole union for the purpose of bargaining. There cannot be any preference in this regard for a particular union alone for participating in negotiations and settlements with the management. Out great nation being a largest and vibrant democracy in the world is consistently insisting equal opportunity to the citizen for effective participation in the decision making progress at all levels and the same must prevail even in unions and associations.
5. Thus, the very relief as such sought for in this writ petition portrays an autocratic attitude of the writ petitioner union, which can never and ever be encouraged or entertained by the constitutional Courts. Monopoly can never be considered as a best policy in a democratic country. Every citizen of this country is to be treated equally and every citizen is important and no one should be treated less than any other citizen and the class of equality under the Constitution must be progressively developed, so as to eradicate a minor level of inequality even now prevailing in Indian society. This being the ultimate spirit of the preamble of our Indian Constitution and the Constitutional Mandate is also unambiguous in this regard, this Court is of an opinion that it is the duty of all the citizen to strive to achieve the ultimate Constitutional goal for an effective and a model society in the world.
5(a). This Court is duty bound to remind that the Constitutional Courts though repeatedly considering the rights of the citizen and the duties of the citizens are rarely dealt with even by the Constitutional Courts. Probably, the occasion would not arise frequently. This Court takes this opportunity to remind that the fundamental duties requires every citizen to abide by the Constitution and respect its philosophies and ideologies and the institutions constituted thereon, including the National Flag and National Anthem.
6. When the constitution itself was formulated WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a [SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC] and to secure to all its citizens.
7. The duties are enumerated precisely in Article 51 [A] of the Constitution of India and those are extracted hereunder:
51A. It shall be the duty of every citizen of India—
(a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem;
(b) to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom;
(c) to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India;
(d) to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so;
(e) to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women;
(f) to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;
(g)
