- (1.) CM No.15078 of 2014 Reply filed on behalf of petitioner to the application for vacation of stay is taken record. Exemption granted and the documents Annexures P12 to P18 are taken on record. Application stands disposed of. CM No.14384 of 2014 Respondent No.3 has filed the present application for vacation of stay granted on 12.11.2014. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the main case itself is taken up today for final disposal. Civil Writ Petition No.23086 of 2014 1. This Court has passed an order suspending the registration of Trade Union made by the 2nd respondent-Registrar of Trade Unions on a plea by the Management that the factory employed 89 persons permanently and 354 trainees, who are also to be treated as workmen and that the registration of Trade Union with a membership of less than 10% of the total workforce was not competent in the light of Section 9-A of the Trade Unions Act of 1926. The plea was made to the effect that the Union, that was registered, had only 34 persons at the time of seeking for registration which fell below the 10% mark which was the statutory minimum.
(2.) The application for vacating the order has been filed by the workmen contending that the trainees are not to be treated as workmen in the light of definition of "workman" in Section 2(g) that defines trade dispute which also includes the definition of "workman" to mean, "all persons employed in trade or industry whether or not in the employment of the employer with whom the trade dispute arises." The contention is that the contract of employment provided to 354 trainees makes no reference to appointment as permanent employees to qualify for the treatment as workmen. The counsel would take me to the terms and conditions of appointment as operated trainees (OT-1) that there is no tenure of employment provided and the reference at all places in the terms and conditions is only to a period of training and even the continuation of training was only stated to be subject to the satisfactory verification of the credentials. The learned counsel would, therefore, state that all these persons could not be treated as workmen and if they are taken out of reckoning, there were only 89 permanent workmen and the registration made with 32, who are members, was above the statutory limit. The counsel would state in any event that if the trainees were also to be included, presently there are 45 workmen, who are members of the Union and, therefore, there is no defect in registration.
(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant-respondent has another objection to take about the maintainability of the writ petition in view of the fact that the cancellation of registration is possible by applying before the Registrar himself under Section 10 and a person, who is aggrieved by such a decision, will also have a right of appeal under Section 11. The resort to this court under Article 226 was not justified and even as a measure of equity, the conduct of the Management was such that they ought not to be favoured with any discretionary order of stay. The allusion is to the fact that the Management had suspended all the 45 workers, who were members of the Union.;