Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Maharashtra Lok Kamgar Sanghatana, an unrecognized trade union registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Industrial Court, Chandrapur dated 03.05.2006. The Industrial Court had dismissed the union's ULP Complaint No. 77 of 2000 (Old No. 964 of 2000) filed under items 5, 9, and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (ULP Act). The Industrial Court held that the grievance actually fell under item 6 of Schedule IV and that the petitioner, being an unrecognized union, was not competent to maintain a complaint under that item. The union had earlier filed a ULP Complaint No. 1286 of 1987 under items 5, 6, and 9 of Schedule IV, which was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh complaint only in respect of items 5 and 9, not item 6. The present complaint was filed alleging that the employer, Ballarpur Industries Limited, continued to employ union members on daily wages from 1972 or 1982 without regularizing them, which constituted unfair labour practices under items 5, 9, and 10. The Industrial Court, however, treated the complaint as one under item 6 and dismissed it on the ground of lack of locus standi. The High Court, after hearing arguments, framed the legal issue as whether an unrecognized union can maintain a complaint under item 6 of Schedule IV. The court analyzed the provisions of the ULP Act, particularly Section 22 which restricts the right of unrecognized unions to file complaints under certain items but does not include item 6. The court held that item 6 of Schedule IV is not a grievance that only a recognized union can raise; therefore, the Industrial Court erred in dismissing the complaint. The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to the Industrial Court for fresh consideration on merits, directing that the complaint be treated as one under items 5, 9, and 10 of Schedule IV. The court also disposed of the pending civil application.
Headnote
A) Trade Union Law - Locus Standi - Unrecognized Union - Item 6 of Schedule IV - Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 - The issue was whether an unrecognized union can maintain a complaint under item 6 of Schedule IV. The Industrial Court had dismissed the complaint holding that the grievance fell under item 6 and the petitioner being an unrecognized union was not competent. The High Court held that item 6 does not require the complainant to be a recognized union; the restriction under Section 22 of the Act applies only to items 1 to 5 and 7 to 9 of Schedule IV. The court allowed the petition and remanded the matter for fresh consideration on merits. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an unrecognized trade union is competent to maintain a complaint under item 6 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971?
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Impugned order of Industrial Court dated 03.05.2006 set aside. Matter remanded to Industrial Court for fresh consideration on merits, treating complaint as under items 5, 9, and 10 of Schedule IV. Civil Application No. 420 of 2010 disposed of.
Law Points
- Unrecognized trade union can maintain complaint under item 6 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act
- 1971
- Item 6 of Schedule IV is not a grievance of recognized union only
- Industrial Court erred in dismissing complaint on ground of lack of locus standi
