The court clarified that under Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act, the right to representation by officers of associations is unconditional and not subject to restrictions imposed by sub-section (4).

ORDER

Per : Justice Vivek Rusia Regard being had to the similitude to the controversy involved in the present cases, with the joint request of the parties, both these petitions are finally heard and decided by this common order. Facts are

being taken from Misc. Petition No.6022 of 2024.

02. Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by order dated 16.10.2024 passed by Industrial Tribunal, Indore in case

No.11/ID/2024, whereby an application filed under Section 36 (3) & (4) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as “I.D. Act”) by respondent No.1 has been decided against the petitioners. The respondents No.2 & 3 (in this writ petition) have also challenged the order dated 16.10.2024 as well as the order dated 22.10.2024 by way of Misc. Petition No.6648 of 2024.

03. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act having its registered office at Century Bhawan, Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai. Previously the petitioner was known as Century Textiles & Industries Ltd. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacturing and sale of denim and century yarn from its unit situated at Village and Post Satrati, District Khargone (M.P.). The petitioner has sold its unit to respondents No.2 & 3.

04. The respondent No.1 is a Union registered under the provisions of Trade Unions Act, 1926. The members of the union were employee of Century Textiles & Industries Ltd. Century Textiles & Industries Ltd., which issued a notice dated 29.06.2021 to them intimating about intention to sale two units to respondents No.2 & 3 and also offered Voluntary Retirement Scheme / Voluntary Separation Scheme to be availed by the workmen within 15 days of the issuance of the notice.

The respondent No.1 challenged the said notice by way of Writ Petition No.11885 of 2021, which was disposed of vide order dated 03.08.2021 with a liberty to avail the remedy available under the I.D. Act. The respondent No.1 preferred a Writ Appeal No.746 of 2021 which was dismissed vide order dated 13.09.2021. There after respondent No.1 approached the Labour Commissioner by filing an application under Section 10(2) of I.D. Act seeking reference of industrial dispute before the Industrial Tribunal. Vide order dated 14.12.2021, the Labour Commissioner refused to refer the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal. The respondent No.1 challenged the aforesaid order by way of Writ Petition No.28206 of 2021 and vide order dated 13.09.2023, the Writ Court allowed the writ petition and directed the Labour Commissioner to make a reference of dispute in the Industrial Tribunal. Thereafter, Century Textiles & Industries Ltd. filed a Writ Appeal No.1768 of 2023 which came to be dismissed vide order dated 23.01.2024.

05. The Labour Commissioner, Indore vide order dated 01.03.2024 has referred the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.1 to the Industrial Tribunal. Before the Industrial Tribunal, respondent No.1 submitted the statement of claim and the petitioner and respondents No.2 & 3 marked their presence through advocate. The respondent No.1 filed an application under Section 36(3) & (4) of I.D. Act objecting the representation of the petitioner and the respondents No.2 & 3 (i.e. petitioners in MP No.6648 of 2024) by the advocates. The petitioner being a second party filed the reply stating that the second party No.1 became a member of the Association of Industries and Institution which is an association of various entities and persons stated to be owing and running the industrial / commercial establishment, factory, institution, etc. The petitioner also filed a resolution of association of industries and Signed by: DIVYANSH institution dated 25.08.2022 disclosing the name of post holders and members, therefore, by virtue of resolution and the provisions of Section

36(2) of ID Act, all the members and post holders can represent the company before the Court of law. In support of the aforesaid contention, judgment dated 20.02.2007 passed by the High Court of