Point of Law :
When a worker goes on strike, he merely voices his concern that his working condition should be improved by meeting his demands. It is not the expression of an intention to abandon the work in which he/she is engaged

JUDGMENT :

R.S. Chauhan, J.

1. These six Writ Petitions have been filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation ('PIL') before this Court. The petitioners, in these writ petitions, have prayed for five different reliefs:--

(i) to declare the strike being observed by respondent Nos. 6 and 7 as illegal,

(ii) to direct the State Government, and the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation ('the Corporation', for short), to negotiate with the trade unions,

(iii) to direct the trade unions to call off the strike,

(iv) to direct the State Government and the Corporation to take stern action against the trade unions, and

(v) to resolve the issues between the trade unions and the Corporation.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the on 31.08.2019, TSRTC Telangana Jathiya Mazdoor Union gave a notice to the Corporation stating that until and unless their demands are met, they propose to go on strike. Likewise, on 11.09.2019, the RTC Telangana Mazdoor Union, the respondent No. 7, gave a notice in similar terms. Considering the fact that there was a likelihood of an industrial dispute that may erupt, the proceedings under Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('the Act', for short) commenced. By notice dated 16.09.2019, the Conciliation Officer directed both the trade unions, and the Corporation to appear before the Conciliation Officer. The conciliation meeting was held on 04.10.2019. However, the conciliation proceedings failed to resolve the dispute between the Corporation, and the trade unions. On 05.10.2019, the trade unions went on strike.

3. Due to the strike observed by the trade unions, the people of the State started suffering as the road transport sector came to a grinding halt." Hence, these Writ Petitions, in the form of PILs, were submitted before this Court over a period of time. Since the reliefs being sought by different writ petitioners are similar in nature, the six petitions are being decided by this common order.

4. Aware of the plight of the people, and hoping that all the three parties, namely the trade unions, the Corporation, and the State Government would resolve their disputes inter se, so as to end the agony of the people, from 10.10.2019 till 12.11.2019 this Court repeatedly requested the State Government, and the Corporation to negotiate with the trade unions, and to end the strike. However, despite the hope of this Court that the parties would resolve their disputes, so far, the disputes have remained unresolved. In fact, even today, the strike continues. This is, perhaps, the longest strike observed by the trade unions in the State.

5. However, it is pertinent to point out that during the course of the proceedings before this Court, the trade unions had offered to negotiate without insisting with their first demand for merger of the Corporation with the Government has to be accepted. Moreover, when this Court had suggested the constitution of a committee consisting of three former Hon'ble Judges of the Apex Court, the trade unions offered to call off the strike in case the disputes were to be referred to the said committee to be constituted by this Court. But the State Government, and the Corporation were not willing to appear before any such committee slated to be constituted by this Court. Considering the stand being taken by all the three parties, this Court thought it proper to hear these writ petitions on merit.

6. The two issues before this Court are:-(i) whether this Court has the power to declare the strike as illegal or not? and (ii) whether this Court has the power to direct the Corporation to enter into negotiations with the trade unions or not?

7. In order to adjudicate upon the twin issues, this Court had requested Mr. G. Vidya Sagar, the learned Senior Counsel, to assist this Court.

8. Mr. G. Vidya Sagar, the learned Senior Counsel, submits that Section 12 of the Act specifies the duties of the Conciliation Officer. According to the said Section, where an industrial dispute exists, or