Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, a Government of India Undertaking, filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the first respondent, Karnataka Petroleum & Gas Workers Union, and their agents, supporters, associates, patrons, members, and accomplices, from holding any strike, agitation, dharna, gherao, picketing, or slogan shouting within a radius of 500 meters of all three establishments of the petitioner situated in Karnataka State, as indicated in Annexures-A, B, and C. The petitioner contended that the union was threatening to hold strikes and agitations, which would disrupt the supply and distribution of petroleum products, including Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG), and cause public inconvenience. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the right to strike is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) and (3). The court further held that the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provides for legal strikes under Sections 22 and 23, subject to compliance with procedural requirements. The court observed that the petitioner failed to establish any imminent threat to public order or breach of peace, and therefore, a blanket injunction restraining the union from holding peaceful agitations was not warranted. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights - Right to Form Associations and Trade Unions - Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India - The right to form associations and trade unions includes the right to carry on activities for the protection of the interests of members, including the right to strike and hold peaceful agitations. The court held that the right to strike is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c), subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) and (3). (Paras 1-5) B) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Legal Strike - Sections 22 and 23 - The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provides for legal strikes under Sections 22 and 23, subject to compliance with procedural requirements. The court held that a blanket injunction restraining a union from holding any strike or agitation without evidence of imminent threat to public order or property is not warranted. (Paras 1-5) C) Writ Jurisdiction - Injunction Against Trade Union - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - The High Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, cannot issue a blanket injunction restraining a trade union from holding peaceful agitations without specific evidence of imminent threat to public order or breach of peace. The court held that the petitioner failed to establish any such threat, and therefore, the writ petitions were dismissed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus or injunction restraining a trade union from holding strikes, agitations, dharnas, gheraos, picketing, or slogan shouting within a radius of 500 meters of the petitioner's establishments, in the absence of any specific threat to public order or breach of peace.
Final Decision
The writ petitions were dismissed. The court held that the right to strike is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, subject to reasonable restrictions, and that the petitioner failed to establish any imminent threat to public order or breach of peace warranting a blanket injunction.
Law Points
- Right to strike is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India
- subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) and (3). Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 provides for legal strikes under Section 22 and 23. Courts cannot issue blanket injunctions restraining unions from holding peaceful agitations without evidence of imminent threat to public order or property.
