IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that adherence to procedural requirements in union recognition processes is essential and that existing unions are not adversely affected by new recognition efforts.

ORDER :

Surepalli Nanda, J.

Heard learned counsel Sri B. Shiva Kumar, appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing on behalf of the Respondents 1 to 3 & 5 and Sri A.Suryanarayana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“declaring the action of the Respondent No. 2 conducting the recognition process of the Respondent No. 4 including the petitioner union’s name contrary to the procedure and also against the undertaking given before the Respondent No.5 Authority as illegal, arbitrary and unjust, consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to conduct a fresh recognition process without including the Petitioner’s union name”.

PERUSED THE RECORD :

3. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and in particular, para Nos. 16, 17, 18, 23, 24 and 25, read as under:

“16. In this connection, it is submitted that the allegation made by the Petitioner is absolutely wrong because the Secret Ballot is conducted from the list of all eligible Workmen and there is every possibility that some of the Workmen who are the members of 'DEFMETLAB Workers National Union' may utilize their franchise and cast their vote in favour of 'DMRL Karmika Sangh Union' also if DEFMETLAB Workers National Union' name and logo is not there in the ballot paper. The procedure adopted by the Office of the Respondent No.2 is valid and just and not highly illegal and arbitrary as alleged by the Petitioner in this paragraph.

17. In reply to para No. (6) it is submitted that the representative of the Office of the Respondent No.2 has stated that the election process is only for the 'DMRL Karmika Sangh’ to ascertain whether they meet 15% of membership strength of Workmen and the process of Secret Ballot will not affect the existing recognized Petitioner's Union i.e. 'DEFMETLAB Workers National Union'.

18. It is submitted that when there is a recognized Union already existing in the Office of Respondent No.2 and another Registered Union is seeking the recognition from the Competent Authority, Secret Ballot system is followed, in the absence of Check-off system. In the Ballot paper, the name (s) all Unions recognized/unrecognized should be printed to avoid dual membership. It does not mean that the Office of Respondent No.2 would like to determine the relative strength of any Union participated in the Secret Ballot election as alleged by the Petitioner. This exercise has been made to avoid dual membership and the procedure adopted is valid and just but it is not illegal and arbitrary as alleged by the Petitioner in this paragraph.

23. In reply to para No. (11) it is submitted that the Petitioner states that there is no objection from their side for recognition of 'DMRL Karmika Sangh', Respondent No.4 Union yet they raise some objection or the other in the process of Secret Ballot election for verification of membership of 'DMRL Karmika Sangh Union'. The Petitioner knows very well that the Secret Ballot election conducted by Respondent No.2 for recognition of Respondent No.4 does not harm them in any way and the Petitioner's Union would continue to function with the recognition already granted to them and there will be no verification of membership in their respect for the present.

24. It is submitted that unless the names and symbols of all Unions existed in the Office of Respondent No.2 are shown in the ballot paper, the method of secret ballot election process will not be proper to ascertain the mandatory requirement whether the Union, seeking recognition, meets the criteria of 15% membership from the total strength of eligible Workmen in the Office of Respondent No. 2. The above said procedure is very much essential in the secret ballot election to avoid dual membership from the eligible Workmen otherwise the Management i.e. Respondent No.2 will be subject to face different types of problems from different angles.

2