Ernakulam District Construction and Allied Workers Union (INTUC) v. Ernakulam District Construction Workers Union Labour Port and Registrar of Trade Unions (Kerala High Court batch of WP(C) Nos. 31236/2018; 4342/2019; 5848/2019)

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU** # **TUESDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 31236 of 2018** ## **PETITIONER/S:** - **1 ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION (INTUC) REG.NO. 07-06/2015, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT COMMITTEE, INTUC OFFICE, VALANJAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM 682016, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SHAJI P.N** - **2 SANTHOSH.K.V., KATTIYATTU THAYYIL, PUTHUVAIPU PO, KOCHI - 682 008.** **BY ADVS. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN ASHA K.SHENOY C.ANILKUMAR SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN T.C. KRISHNA** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS UNION LABOUR PORT, KALABHAVAN ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682018, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY** - **2 THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH KUM.NEETHU SOMAN** -2- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 **SRI.FRANKLIN ARACKAL SRI.PAUL C THOMAS SRI.T.K.DEVARAJAN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.02.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).4342/2019, WP(C).5848/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 -3- ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU** **TUESDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 4342 of 2019** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS UNION, LABOUR PORT, KALABHAVAN ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 018, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY MR. RAJAPPAN PILLAI.** **BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH SRI.A.TJOSE SRI.FRANKLIN ARACKAL SRI.M.B.SOORI SRI.PAUL C THOMAS SRI.T.K.DEVARAJAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**STATE OF KERALA,**| |---|---| ||**REP. BY THE SECRETARY, LABOUR AND**| ||**REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF**| ||**KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.**| |**2**|**THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER,**| ||**OFFICE OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THOZHIL**| ||**BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.**| |**3**|**THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER**| ||**AND DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION, OFFICE**| ||**OF THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, CIVIL**| ||**STATION, KAKKANAD- 682 030**| -4- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 **4 ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION (INTUC), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT COMMITTEE, INTUC OFFICE, VALANJAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM-682 016** **BY ADVS. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN SMT.ASHA K.SHENOY SMT.PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212) SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE SRI.T.C.KRISHNA** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI. C.S. AJITH PRAKASH** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.02.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).5848/2019, WP(C).31236/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 -5- ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU** **TUESDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 5848 of 2019** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS UNION, LABOUR PORT, KALABHAVAN ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682018, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, MR.RAJAPPAN PILLAI.** **BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH A.T.JOSE SRI.FRANKLIN ARACKAL SRI.M.B.SOORI SRI.PAUL C THOMAS SRI.T.K.DEVARAJAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**STATE OF KERALA,**| |---|---| ||**REP. BY THE SECRETARY, LABOUR AND**| ||**REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF**| ||**KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.**| |**2**|**THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER,**| ||**OFFICE OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THOZHIL**| ||**BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.**| |**3**|**THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS AND THE**| ||**DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER,**| ||**OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, CIVIL**| ||**STATION, KAKKANAD-682030.**| -6- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).31236/2018, WP(C).4342/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** -7- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 ## **JUDGMENT** **[ WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 ,WP(C).5848/2019 ]** This batch comprises three Writ Petitions. Two petitions filed by the Ernakulam District Construction Workers Union and another by the Ernakulam District Construction Allied Workers' Union. To be specific, W.P.(C) Nos.4342 of 2019 and 5848 of 2019 are filed by the Ernakulam District Construction Workers Union. And W.P.(C)No.31236 of 2018 by the Ernakulam District Construction Allied Workers' Union. All these Writ Petitions have raised a common issue: the legitimacy of the Ernakulam District Construction Workers Union to use the registration number of an erstwhile union— Marine Drive Workers Union. 2. The petitioner claims it is a trade union having 16000 workmen as its members. As to its origins, it further claims that its predecessor was Marine Drive Workers Union, with the registration No.612 of 1976. But as that union later -8- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 became dysfunctional, the same office bearers—especially its President Adv.K.P.Haridas—applied for a change of name and secured the Ext.P1. 3. In other words, the Ernakulam District Construction Workers Union succeeded the Marine Drive Workers Union and has continued to exist to this date with the same registration number. It also claims it has all along been filing returns and participating in the negotiations in Ernakulam District. 4. Later, acting on the complaint by Ernakulam District Construction Allied Workers' Union, the respondent authorities issued the Ext.P14 order in W.P.(C)No.4342 of 2019. The petitioner union was restrained from using the registration number of Marine Drive Workers Union. Later, the authorities have also passed a consequential order, dt.28.01.2019, challenged in W.P.(C)No.5848 of 2019. 5. In the above factual context, Sri Ajith Prakash, the -9- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 learned counsel for the petitioner, has taken me to the statutory scheme that may affect the case on hand. He has referred to Section 25(3) of the Trade Union Act, 1926, and Regulation 16 of the Kerala Trade Union Regulations. He then asserts that the petitioner union followed due process and had its name changed. About the documents that concern the change of name, Sri Prakash submits that because of the long lapse of time, the petitioner has lost them. At any rate, the Ext.P1 certificate, he asserts, is over 30-year old, and it sustains a statutory presumption about its genuineness. So all consequences should flow from its statutorily presumed genuineness. 6. About the Ext.P14, Sri Prakash contends that it violates many statutory safeguards, including the principles of natural justice as well. He complains that the petitioner union has never been put on notice about the rival union’s complaint, nor has it been heard when the authorities have -10- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 passed the Ext.P14. 7. As with the Ext.P1 order in W.P.(C)No.5848 of 2019, Sri Prakash contends that it is beyond the Deputy Registrar’s jurisdiction. According to him, even an unregistered union could have the bargaining power and espouse its members’ cause in any industrial dispute. To support his contentions, Sri Prakash relies on _Newspapers Limited, Allahabad v. State Industrial Tribunal, Uttar Pradesh_[1] _; Workmen of Indian Express Newspaper Private Ltd. v. The Management of Indian Express Private Ltd._[2] _;_ and _The Management of Messrs. Gammon (India) Ltd._ . _v. State of Orissa_[3] 8. Sri P. Ramakrishnan, the learned counsel for the 4th respondent in WP(C) Nos. 4342 of 2019 and 5848 of 2019, and for petitioner in WP(C) No. 31236 of 2018, contends with equal vehemence that the petitioner has played fraud on this Court; it deserves no equitable consideration. To elaborate, > 1(1960) II LLJ 37 SC 2(1970) II LLJ 132 SC > 3(1974) II LLJ 34 -11- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 Sri Ramakrishnan has made strenuous efforts to expose, what he terms, the petitioner’s duplicity in stealing some other trade union’s identity. 9. To begin with, Sri Ramakrishnan has drawn my attention to Ext.P1, the certificate the petitioner allegedly secured under Section 8 and 9 of the Trade Unions Act, read with Regulations 6 and 7 of the Regulations. According to him, on changing its name, a Trade Union would get the original certificate endorsed with the new name, rather than a new certificate issued. So he contends that the Ext.P1 certificate is forged. 10. To elaborate, Sri Ramakrishnan also contends that save Ext.P8, the remaining returns in Exts.P9 to P12 were filed on the same day in 2018, though they belong to different years. About the petitioner’s inability to produce the relevant documents, he contends that both the Act and the Regulations have prescribed an elaborate procedure. But -12- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 the petitioner could produce no scrap of paper here to convince the Court that there had been a change of the Union’s name and that the Ext.P1 certificate is genuine. According to him, though the law mandates that there should have been a resolution by the Trade Union and a notice issued on that count, the petitioner could produce neither. 11. On the lack of opportunity, the petitioner has complained about, Sri Ramakrishnan has drawn my attention to Ext.R4(a). To hammer home his contention, he contends that the authorities concerned have, in fact, heard the petitioner's representatives and then passed the Ext.P14. And that order concerns why the authorities should restrain the petitioner from acting on some other trade union’s registration number. 12. Of course, the petitioner's counsel is quick to contest the fourth respondent’s counter-assertion. -13- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 According to him, it is the Deputy Labour Officer, who heard the petitioner Union’s Secretary. Swiftly comes the rebuttal from Sri Ramakrishnan that the very document reveals that it is the District Labour Officer, who acted in the dual capacity. 13. Heard Sri Ajith Prakash, the petitioner's counsel, Sri P. Ramakrishnan, the 4th respondent’s counsel, and the Government Pleader. 14. Indeed, the entire dispute, spanning across three writ petitions, concerns a purely disputed question of fact. The petitioner asserts that the Trade Union has changed its name but continued to have the same registration number. Equally assertive is the counter-argument that the first Union, that is Marine Drive Workers' Union, was registered on 15th December 1976; on the very same date, there could not have been a change of name. As the allegations fly thick and fast from either end, I reckon, this Court in summary -14- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 adjudication under Article 226 is ill-equipped to rule on any of them. Suffice it to say that whatever be its legitimacy, the petitioner's union ostensibly continued with a particular registration number at least recently, as Exts. P2 to P9 would attest. The consequences of Ext.P14 in WPC No.4342 of 2019 and also Ext.P1 in WP(C) No.5848 of 2019, however, are farreaching, affecting the civil rights of the petitioner union’s members. 15. That said, I must hold that the Court is disinclined to enter the arena of the disputed questions of fact. So I leave the merits of the rival contentions untouched. Further, as I shun adjudication on merits, I do not refer to the decisions the counsel cited. Evidently, the authorities have acted on a complaint from the fourth respondent and passed the Ext.P14 order. The petitioner’s representatives do not seem to have been heard before they could render that order. As a result, the Ext.P14 suffers from the vice of violating the -15- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 principles of natural justice and thus needs to be set aside. 16. So I only hold in the interest of justice that the Registrar of Trade Union, Thiruvananthapuram, will put the petitioner and the 4th respondent on notice about the dispute: the petitioner’s registration and identity. The Registrar will supply to the petitioner a copy of the complaint referred to in Ext.P14 and, later, adjudicate the issue. While his deciding the issue, if either party seeks access to the records, the Registrar may consider that request subject to the law. Given the arrangement now the Court has made about fresh adjudication of the dispute, both Ext.P14 in WPC No.4342 of 2019 and Ext.P1 in the W.P.(C) No. 5848 of 2019 stand set aside. 17. To be abundantly clear, I state that the Court has expressed no opinion on the merits and both the petitioner and the 4th respondent, besides any other affected person, may espouse their cause before the Registrar of the Trade -16- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 Union or any other competent authority. Given the intensity this case has generated, the adjudicating authority will decide the issue, expeditiously, in two months, after his receiving a copy of this judgment. Thus stand all the three writ petitions disposed of. No order on costs. Sd/- **DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU** **JUDGE** sd/das -17- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31236/2018** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION NO.07-06 OF 2015 DATED 8/4/2015 ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 27/1/2018 MADE UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT 2005.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 1/3/2018 FROM THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER AND DY.LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 9/8/2018 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** sd/das WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 -18- ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4342/2019** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION DATED 15.12.2976 TO IN THE NAME OF ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS UNION.** **EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 23.12.2016** - **EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNION PRODUCED IN WPC NO 31236/2018** - **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE QUERY PUY BY ONE MR. JOSE T.J. DATED 27.1.2018** - **EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE OFFICE OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER DATED 1.3.2018** - **EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 9.8.2018 PRODUCED IN WPC NO 31236/2018** - **EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2011** - **EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FROM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2012** ## **EXHIBIT P9** **A TRUE COPY OF THE RERUN IN FORM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2013** -19- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 - **EXHIBIT P10** - **A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FROM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2014** - **EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2015** - **EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2016** - **EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2017** - **EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 1.1.2019 TO THE PETITIONER** sd/das -20- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5848/2019** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** - **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 28.1.2019 WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION** - **EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN WPC.4342/2019 DATED 21.1.2019** **EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRESENT LETTER PAD USING BY THE PETITIONER UNION** - **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION DATED 15.12.1976, IN THE NAME OF ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS UNION** - **EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONE SUCH LETTER DATED 4.2.2019 CARRYING THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER UNION ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) KOCHI** - **EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER UNION DATED 2.12.2016 FOR GENERAL VERIFICATION OF TRADE UNION MEMBERSHIP ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) ERNAKULAM** - **EXHIBIT P7** - **A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) DATED 23.12.2016** **EXHIBIT P8** **A TRUE COPY OF THE QUERRY PUT BY ONE JOSE T.J. DATED 27.1.2018 WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION** -21- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 **EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE OFFICE OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER DATED 1.3.2018 WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION** - **EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM 1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2011** - **EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM-1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2012** - **EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM-1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2013** - **EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM-1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2014** - **EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM-1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2015** - **EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM-1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2016** - **EXHIBIT P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN IN FORM-1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION FOR THE YEAR 2017** **EXHIBIT P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF THE PETITIONER UNION DATED 26.3.2018 BEFORE THE DEPUTY LABOUR OFFICER WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION** -22- WP(C) 31236/2018 ,WP(C).4342/2019 , WP(C).5848/2019 **EXHIBIT P18 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 1.1.2019 TO THE PETITIONER WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION** sd/das