T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.

1. This appeal by the appellant/1st respondent is directed against the order in Writ Petition No. 4505 of 2019 dated 08.03.2019.

2. The said writ petition was filed by the 1st respondent-Labour Union praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Tamil Nadu, Chennai, dated 05.02.2019 in I.A. No. 6 of 2019 in I.D. Nos. 3 and 29 of 2013 and to direct the Industrial Tribunal to implead the 1st respondent-Labour Union as a party respondent in I.D. Nos. 3 and 29 of 2013. The writ petition was allowed by the impugned order thereby, the 1st respondent-Union was impleaded as a party respondent in I.D. Nos. 3 and 29 of 2013. The appellant, who was the 1st respondent in the writ petition is aggrieved by such order. The appellant/1st respondent is the Labour Union which raised the industrial dispute now pending on the file of the Industrial Tribunal in I.D. Nos. 3 and 29 of 2013. The following facts would be relevant for the disposal of this appeal.

3. The appellant-Labour Union raised the industrial dispute on behalf of its workmen who were employed by the 2nd respondent-Management, the same was referred for adjudication before the Industrial Tribunal, Chennai. At the relevant time, the appellant-Labour Union was the only union representing all the workmen of the 2nd respondent-Management. According to the appellant, the Management has been signing settlements with them with regard to the wages and other conditions of service of the workmen for several years and the last wage settlement was signed on 21.09.2006, which came to an end on 30.09.2010. After the wage settlement came to an end, the appellant-Union raised a charter of demands and at the relevant time, elections were held to the office bearers of the appellant-Union and they were elected. The elected office bearers chose to commence litigation against the 2nd respondent-management to press their charter of demands. There was a dissenting voice among a group of workers who opined that issues relating to wage revision and other conditions of service could be settled through negotiation with the 2nd respondent-Management. This dissent caused a rift in the appellant-Union ultimately leading to the expulsion of some of the workmen from the appellant-Union. These expelled workmen formed the 1st respondent-Union called the Roca Ranipet Labour Union, which was registered under the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, 1926. They stated that they had membership of 122 workers in the new union, they negotiated with the 2nd respondent-Management and entered into a settlement dated 21.01.2019. Since the dispute raised by the appellant-Union was referred to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication, contending that any orders passed in the industrial dispute would affect the rights of the members of the 1st respondent-Union, they sought to implead themselves in the industrial dispute and filed I.A. No. 6 of 2019. The impleadment was opposed by the appellant-union and the Industrial Tribunal by order dated 05.02.2019 dismissed the application primarily on the ground that earlier, I.A. No. 4 of 2018 was filed for impleading the 1st respondent-Union by the 2nd respondent-management which was dismissed and therefore, a second application for impleadment of the 1st respondent-Union cannot be entertained. Further, the Industrial Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was lack of bona fides on the side of the 1st respondent-Union and therefore, the application was not maintainable.

4. The 1st respondent-Union filed the writ petition contending that they have a right to be heard in the matter, when it represents a sizeable number of workers of the 2nd respondent-Management. Further, it was contended that any decision by the Industrial Tribunal in the pending dispute raised by the appellant-Union would have a bearing on their working conditions and therefore, it is imperative that they be made a party and hea