Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Appellants contend that the view which was first expressed by this Court in General Labour Union (Red flag), Bombay vs. Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. and others, (1995) 1 Suppl. SCC 175, subsequently echoed in many cases including Vividh Kamgar Sabha vs. Kalyani Steels Ltd. and another, (2001) 2 SCC 381 and finally in Cipla Ltd. vs. Maharashtra General Kamgar Union and others, (2001) 3 SCC 101 is legally unsound and needs a fresh look.
(3.) It was held in first of the three cases that the workmen have to establish that they are workmen of the respondent-company before they can file any complaint under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (in short the Maharashtra Act). Similar was the view expressed in Vividh Kamgars case (supra) and Cipla Ltd.s case (supra).;