- (1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record of the case carefully.
(2.) The petitioner has invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for following reliefs: I. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the word, 'TOTAL ELECTORATE' in para 4(1) of the Final Modalities and in its place, the word 'VALID VOTE POLLED' be replaced; II. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the words, 'GETS ATLEAST 35% OF THE VALID VOTES POLLED' be quashed, in para 4.ii and 4.iii and in its place, 30% may be directed to be kept; III. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the proceedings of Secret Ballot Election for recognition of Trade Unions, 2013 and declaration of result dated 2.5.2013 issued by respondent no. 4; IV. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent no. 1 to 4, not to force the petitioner's Sangh to vacate the office premises and other facilities, provided to other recognized/non-recognized trader unions and similar treatment be made, with unions, having effective membership in the North-Eastern Railway; V. Issue any other writ order direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the present case. VI. Award cost of the petition to the petitioner.
(3.) The petitioner has approached the Court alleging that it is a Union of Class III and IV Railway employees registered under the Trade Union Act and is a body corporate under Section 13 of the said Act. In the year 2007 Secret Ballot Election for recognition of trade union was held by respondent no. 1 and the petitioner having secured 48% votes and recognized trade union of the railwaymen. In the 2013 election the respondents no. 3 to 4 adopted partial attitude and permitted the respondent no. 5 to violate the provisions of the Code of Conduct and Code of Discipline of Final Modalities for Secret Ballot Election and did not take action against respondent no.5. The petitioner had challenged the proceedings of secret ballot election mainly only on the following grounds: a) that the symbol 'red colour flag' was illegally allotted to respondent no. 5 inspite of objection of the petitioner as it is being frequently used by the railwaymen during course of their duties in operation of trains; b) that against the provisions of clause 3(e) of Final Modalities the names of the employees who were not in service from 1.2.2013 till March, 2013 were not deleted from the voters list provided by respondent no. 4, due to which thousands of such employees cast their votes with the help of Polling Officers; c) that the polling agents of the unions were kept out of polling booths due to which mal practices were done by the Polling Officers; d) that the postal ballot papers were sent by courier service violating the terms of the Modalities which provide for sending the same by registered post or speed post, resultantly they did not reach the voters stationed at remote areas; e) that exercising grudge against the petitioner the Asstt. Presiding Officer/DRM (Personnel), Izzatnagar vide leter dated 19.3.2013 had directed the petitioner union to vacate the premises and return the facilities of office, telephone etc., while the respondent no. 5 enjoyed these facilities even after losing election in 2007; f) that the respondent no. 5 used corrupt practice during election as it managed to get support from caste, community based Associations and the General Secretary of respondent no. 5 issue press release in the Media on 24.4.2013 in violation of Modalities and against code of conduct; g) that the respondent no. 5 was allotted official premises in Mechanical Workshop, Gorakhpur and Railway Stations through the zone free of cost by railway which had been used during the course of election converting them at election office in connivance of respondents no. 3 and 4 inspite of the complaint of petitioner dated 24.4.2013; h) that the staff of Engineering Department was deployed on election duty, which was objected by the petitioner and they have pressurized, intimidated and threatened their subordinate voters to vote in favour of their union which affected the free and fair election; i) that the respondents no. 3 and 4 did not finalize the voters' list till 19.3.2013 and material alterations and additions were made therein till the date of election; j) that clause 4 (i), (ii) and (iii) of the Final Modalities providing 30% of the single vote of the total electorate and compulsion of getting 35% of the valid votes polled is conflicting and defeating the very purpose of these clauses and have no rational and purpose for laying down such conditions for recognition of Union as it violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.;