Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC), Maharashtra State Branch, is a registered trade union under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, registered on 12.9.1973 with registration No.1852. The petitioner is the authorized body of AITUC at the Maharashtra State level. On 4.12.2004, the Deputy Registrar of Trade Unions (respondent No.1) registered respondent No.2 under the name 'AITUC Hawkers Union' with registration number ALC/Desk-17/10026. The petitioner contended that respondent No.2 is not affiliated to AITUC and that the name gives a wrong impression and is likely to deceive the general public into believing that the union is affiliated to AITUC. The petitioner made a complaint to respondent No.1 by letter dated 4.1.2005, but no action was taken. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quashing of the registration. The Court held that the name 'AITUC Hawkers Union' is deceptively similar to the petitioner's name and is likely to deceive the public. The Registrar failed to give notice to the petitioner before registration, which was required under Section 7 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The Court quashed the registration of respondent No.2 and directed the Registrar to cancel the registration. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Trade Unions Act, 1926 - Section 7 - Registration of Trade Union - Deceptive Name - The Registrar registered a union named 'AITUC Hawkers Union' which is deceptively similar to the petitioner's union 'All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC)'. The petitioner, not being affiliated, complained that the name gives a wrong impression and is likely to deceive the public. The Court held that the registration was in violation of Section 7 of the Act as the name is likely to deceive the public and the Registrar failed to give notice to the petitioner before registration. (Paras 2-4) B) Trade Unions Act, 1926 - Section 7 - Duty of Registrar - Notice to Existing Union - The Registrar registered the respondent union without giving any notice to the petitioner, who is the existing registered union with a similar name. The Court held that the Registrar ought to have given notice to the petitioner before registering the name, as the name is likely to deceive the public. The registration was quashed and set aside. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the registration of a trade union with a name deceptively similar to an existing registered union is valid under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, and whether the Registrar is obliged to give notice to the existing union before registering such a name.
Final Decision
The Court allowed the petition, quashed the registration of respondent No.2 union, and directed the Registrar to cancel the registration. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Registration of trade union with name deceptively similar to existing union is prohibited under Section 7 of Trade Unions Act
- 1926
- Duty of Registrar to refuse registration if name is likely to deceive public
- Natural justice requires notice to existing union before registering similar name
