IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
Chhabi Lal Yadav - Petitioner
Versus
Registrar Trade Union Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others - Respondents
WRIT C NO. 26527 OF 2023.
Decided On : 03-01-2024
JUDGMENT
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.
Heard Sri. Alok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Bushra Maryam, learned counsel for respondent no. 3.
2. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed assailing the order/letter dated 07.02.2023 passed/issued by respondent no. 2, Additional Registrar, Trade Union, Uttar Pradesh Kanpur.
3. The facts leading to filing of present petition, are that employees of Small Arms Factory, Kanpur had registered union in the name of "Small Arms Factory Employees Union, Kanpur". The general body of the Union has 665 members. The last of the election was held in the year 2022 and the new office bearers were elected to the said Union. The present petitioner is ex-General Secretary of the Union who has filed the petition alleging certain misrepresentation and concealment of facts while submitting Form-J on 28.08.2022. According to petitioner, the form was to be signed by outgoing General Secretary but it was signed by Joint Secretary and thus certain anomalies have crept in and said Form-J could not be registered with the Registrar.
4. Ventilating his grievance, petitioner had approached the Registrar through a representation on 30.12.2022, on which the Registrar, Trade Union, Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur on 10.01.2023 had required Additional Registrar, Trade Union to look into the matter and do the needful. Pursuant to directions of Registrar, the Additional Registrar proceeded with the matter and on 07.02.2023 had directed the petitioner to approach Civil Court in case he was not satisfied with the registration of Form-J.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that State of Uttar Pradesh by an amendment in the Trade Union Act, 1926 has inserted Section 8-A on 22.03.2022 providing for declaring such documents as null and void, and the Registrar having power to cancel the document in case registration has been obtained by misrepresentation of fact or concealment of fact.
6. He has relied upon the proviso to Section 8(A)(2), and further contends that Regulation 17-A of the U.P. Trade Union Regulation, 1927 provides that the intimation regarding any change in the officers of registered trade union has to be sent in duplicate in Form-J to the Registrar, within a week of such taking place. The intimation sent shall be recorded in the Register of trade union maintained under Section 8 of the Act.
7. According to him, Section 8 has to be read in harmony with Regulation 17-A, and if there is any misrepresentation of fact, the Registrar has to deal with it. He further contended that representation had already been made to the Registrar, who had directed the Additional Registrar to look into the matter and decide the same. However, the Additional Registrar had wrongly relegated the matter to Civil Court without looking into fact that Form-J was not signed by Secretary as mandated by Regulation and had not complied the provisions.
8. Refuting the arguments made from petitioner side, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 3 submitted that Section 8 deals with registration of a trade union, and in no way the said section is attracted in the present case as the trade union was registered way back, and it is a case where the elections have taken place and new office bearers have been elected and the intimation has been sent in Form-J.
9. According to her, Form-J has already been registered on 28.08.2022 and this fact has come in the order of Additional Registrar and if petitioner is aggrieved by the action of Additional Registrar or the Registrar, he has remedy of approaching Civil Court as provided by order dated 07.02.2023.
10. I have heard respective counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
11. The sole controversy raised in the present writ petition hinges around the provisions of Section 8 of the Act of 1926 and Regulation 17-A of the Regulations of 1927. Section 8 of the Act provides for registration of trade union. It is on the satisfactio
The court ruled that disputes regarding the signing of Form-J by trade union officers are factual and not suitable for resolution under Article 226, directing such matters to Civil Court.
The principle of natural justice, including the right to be heard and reasoned decision-making, influenced the court's decision in setting aside the non-speaking cancellation order.
Point of law: If the Registrar is satisfied that the certificate is obtained by fraud or mistake or the Union has ceased to exist, is not the circumstance here and further has willfully and after not....
The Registrar of Trade Unions cannot impose restrictions contrary to the Trade Unions Act, allowing retired employees to serve as office bearers within stipulated limits.
Mixed questions of law and fact in labor disputes should be resolved during final hearings, not as preliminary issues.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.