Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, provides unconditional and absolute rights of representation for workmen and employers in industrial disputes, without imposing conditions on the workman status of the representatives.

A. S. NAIDU, J.

( 1 ) THE pertinent question that arises for determination in the aforesaid A. H. O. as well as the Writ Applications is whether an office-bearer of a worker's union, who is not a workman under the Management can represent the said union in an industrial dispute pending before the Labour Court/industrial Tribunal.

( 2 ) THE Brooke Bond Lipton India Limited has filed A. H. O. No. 203 of 2001 assailing the judgment passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in O. J. C. No. 5269 of 2001 declining to interfere with the Order dated march 7, 2001 passed by the Industrial tribunal, Orissa, Bhubaneswar in I. D. Case no. 102 of 1995 permitting the Vice-President of the Brooke Bond Shramik Union to represent the body of the workmen in the aforesaid I. D. Case.

( 3 ) THE other Writ Applications have been filed either by the Managements or by the workmen's Unions assailing the conflicting orders passed by the Industrial Tribunal in different I. D. Cases, either permitting the office-bearers of the Unions who are not workmen under the said Managements to represent the Workmen's Unions in the I. D. Cases or rejecting the petitions filed by the workmen's Unions seeking permission to be represented by their office-bearers. The point of law involved in all these cases being one and the same, by consent of the parties the aforesaid writ Applications were heard along with the a. H. O. by this Bench and are proposed to be disposed of by this common judgment.

( 4 ) MR. S. B. Nanda, learned senior advocate spearheaded the arguments, followed by other learned counsel appearing in various cases. Relying upon the decision of the supreme Court in the case of State Bank of india Staff Association and another v. State bank of India and others, AIR 1996 SC 1685 : 1996 (4) SCC 378 : 1996-II-LLJ-288, Mr. Nanda submitted that a person who is not an employee under the Management having no cause of action should not be permitted to represent a body of workmen before the industrial Tribunal. In other words only an employee who is an office-bearer of the Union can be permitted to represent the workmen or their Union and none else.

( 5 ) THE learned single Judge in the judgment passed in O. J. C. No. 5269 of 2001 held that the decision of the Supreme Court in 1996-II-LLJ-288 (supra) does not ipso facto apply to proceedings under the I. D. Act where representation of parties is expressly regulated by Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act. Relying upon the decision of the Supreme court in the case of Paradip Port Trust v. Their workmen, reported in AIR 1977 SC 36 : 1976-II-LLJ-409 which was delivered by three-Judge Bench, the learned single Judge disposed of the Writ Application holding that the Industrial Tribunal had rightly permitted the vice-President of the concerned Union to represent the body of workmen.

( 6 ) TO appreciate the arguments advanced by the learned counsel it would be prudent to refer to Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes act, 1947. Sub-Section (1) of Section 36 of the act stipulates that a workman who is a party to a dispute shall be entitled to be represented in any proceeding under the Act by: (a) any member of the executive or other office-bearer of a Registered Trade Union of which he is a member; (b) any member of the executive or other office-bearer of a federation of trade unions to which the trade union referred to in clause (a) is affiliated; (c) where the worker is not a member of any trade union, by any member of the executive or other office-bearer of any trade union connected with, or by any other workman employed in the industry in which the worker is employed and authorized in such manner as may be prescribed. Sub-section (2) of Section 36, at the other hand, stipulates that an employer who is a party to a dispute shall be entitled to be represented in any proceeding under the Act by: (a) an officer of an association of employers of which he is a member; (b) an officer of a federation of associati