Writ petitions concerning internal affairs of private entities are not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution, and disputes should be resolved in civil courts.

ORDER

(1)The writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to hold election to determine the relative strength of all the registered Trade Unions in the 3^rd respondent Company by way of secret Ballot to be conducted under the overall supervision of the 1^st and 2^nd respondents.

(2)The petitioner Union is a registered Union affiliated to CITU formed during 2007. The petitioner states that out of 2250 permanent employees of the 3^rd respondent / Company, more than 60% are members of the petitioner's Union. According to the petitioner, the petitioner represents majority of the workers of the 3^rd respondent/Company, but despite the same, the 3^rd respondent entered into a long term settlement with the 4^th respondent, which would end on 31.03.2024. The petitioner further states that since 2011, it had been submitting the Charter of Demands to the 3^rd respondent/Company, but it failed to negotiate and recognize the petitioner Union. The petitioner states that it gave several representations to the 3^rd respondent as also the respondents 1 and 2, to conduct election through secret ballot to determine the relative strength of the registered Trade Unions in the 3^rd respondent/Company, but to no avail. The petitioner further states that as the 3^rd respondent/Company failed to consider the demand of the petitioner's Union, the petitioner sent a strike notice on 16.12.2023, with a copy marked to respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner/Union states that despite its representations to the respondents 1 and 2 to hold elections by secret ballot to determine the relative strength of all registered Trade Unions, no action was taken and therefore, it was constrained to file the present writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

(3)The respondents 1 and 2 filed a common counter affidavit stating inter- alia that from the reply of the 3^rd respondent/Management, they were given to understand that from the date of formation of the 4^th respondent Union, more than 90% workmen employed in the 3^rd respondent/Company were the members of the 4^th respondent/Union. It was further stated that the Conciliation Authority, had as early as on 21.12.2023, informed the petitioner/Union that there was no provision either under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, or under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, for determination of relative strength of Trade Union by way of secret ballot. The respondents therefore submitted that the writ petition was devoid of merits since, the petitioner/Union was issued necessary advise stating that there was no enabling provision for election through secret ballot. The respondents 1, 2 and 5 therefore prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

(4)The 3^rd respondent/Company filed a counter affidavit stating that it was a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, with a Factory at Irungattukottai, and engaged in the manufacture of passenger cars. The 3^rd respondent further stated that it is one of the largest automobile manufacturers in India, that it was providing employment to around 14,000 persons both directly as well as indirectly and that it was contributing to the nation's economy by earning foreign exchange revenue. The 3^rd respondent stated that, the petitioner/Union, had initially presence in the industry in the year 2007, and thereafter the petitioner/Union instigated its members to indulge in large scale indisciplinary activities at work place causing serious breach of work and industrial peace. The 3^rd respondent further stated that, the petitioner/Union, was resorting to repeated illegal strikes, considerable number of workmen decided to form a separate Union, resulting in the formation and registration of the 4^th respondent in the year 2011. The 3^rd