- (1.) The petitioner, an employee of the first respondent/Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., seeks for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the fourth respondent to verify the accounts of Indian Oil Employees Union, (Southern Region), a registered trade union and to take appropriate action in accordance with law for irregularities committed by the second and third respondents.
(2.) The petitioner claims to be the Working President of the Union having put about 30 years of service in the Corporation. He states that he has held many important positions in the Union. He has also served as Vice-President of the Union for several years. The trade Union was registered under the Trade Union Act. There are about 2500 employees comprised in four southern States. The Union has its own constitution and Bylaws. There are also provisions vesting powers on the respective office-bearers as well as the modalities of work for each of them. The petitioner refers to Clause 20 dealing with the utilisation of the funds of the Union. The petitioner contends that without the approval of the Central Executive Committee or the General Body, the second respondent cannot unilaterally spend any money which was not provided for in Rules 20, 21 and 22. However, according to the petitioner, in spite of the said Rule, the second respondent was acting in blatant violation of the Rules time and again spending huge amounts for the reasons best known to him. Thus, the second respondent has misused his powers and in total disregard of the Rules, has spent huge sums of money. The petitioner has also filed a typed-set of papers with a statement of accounts. It is further stated that the third respondent being the Treasurer of the Union, is duty bound to maintain accounts properly and he has also failed in his duties.
(3.) The petitioner further states that when the second respondent was questioned by the petitioner, and others, he did not even care to reply. A letter dated 1.2.2003 was addressed to the second respondent by a large number of office-bearers including some of the members of the Committee. The second respondent had merely denied the allegations and contended that he has not contravened the Rules. However, after admitting the withdrawal of the amounts as alleged by the complainants, another letter was addressed to the petitioner on 5.2.2003. However, the second respondent had not chosen to reply to the averments raised by the petitioner. Therefore, according to the petitioner, both second and third respondents are suspected to be involved in financial irregularities. When confronted with the said complaints, the second respondent in order to escape from the clutches of law, has now hurriedly conveyed a meeting of the Central Executive Committee. The Agenda for the meeting includes review of the Union activities and presentation of Income and Expenditure statement for the period 1.1.2002 to 31.12.2002. According to the petitioner only in order to justify his illegal action, the meeting has been called for by the second respondent. According to the petitioner, if such accounts are finalised and approved in the meeting, the second respondent may claim that he cannot be proceeded against. The petitioner has therefore, come forward with the above writ petition also with a prayer for interim relief restraining the respondents from taking up Item No.2 in the Agenda namely, presentation of the Income and Expenditure Statement.;