Hanivel Electrical Karamchari Union Sailakuin, Dehradun. vs Labour Commissioner/Registrar Trade Unions Uttarakhand, Haldwani, Nainital and four others.

Hon''ble B.S.Verma, J.

(Stay Application No. 406 of 2012)

(Urgency Application No. 176 of 2012)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the employees of the petitioner''s union to work in the respondent no.3-firm as they were earlier working.

According to the petitioner, the petitioner union and its employees are working under the employer-respondent no.3 and that the respondent no.3 had filed a Civil Suit against its employees for a decree of permanent injunction in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Vikas Nagar, Dehradun.

From a perusal of the averments made in the memo of writ petition, it is obvious that the petitioner Union represents the entire class of workmen of respondent no.3 and they are admittedly workmen. It is admitted in paragraph no. 7 of the memo of petition that that the respondent no.3 has removed all the employees of the union from service on 29-11-2011 and since 2-12-2011, the respondent no. 3-firm has not permitted the employees of the union to enter into the premises of the firm. After due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the grievance of the petitioner falls within the ambit of Industrial Disputes Act and the petitioner may avail appropriate remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act. I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Even otherwise, no case of urgency is made out in favour of the petitioner.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage.

All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.