Krantikari Kamgar Union vs Hindustan Unilever Limited & Anr

M.S.Karnik, J

Heard learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner.

None appears on behalf of the respondents though learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner says that private notice has been served on them.

It is the contention of learned Senior Advocate that around 180 workers who were previously members of the respondent No.2

- Bhartiya Kamgar Sena, resigned from the membership of the Union and joined the petitioner Union. The subscription was being deducted by the

employer from the salary and paid directly to the respondent No.2 - Union.

The petitioner - Union fled an application before the Industrial Court under Section 14 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and

Prevention of Unfair Labor Laws Practices Act, 1971 claiming registration as recognised Union in place of the respondent No.2.

My attention is invited to the paragraph Nos. 23 and 24 of the impugned order. In the submission of learned Senior Advocate, the fndings recorded

are perverse. According to him, there is ample material on record to show that 180 workers did resign from the membership of the respondent No.2 -

Union and join the petitioner - Union.

My attention is invited to the documents at Exhibit 'B' and Exhibit 'C' to contend that not only did the workers resigned from the membership of the

respondent No.2 - Union but they had in fact joined the petitioner - Union in which case the Industrial Court should have allowed the application of the

petitioner - Union for registration as recognised Union in place of the respondent No.2 - Union.

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 13/8/2021. In addition to the Court's notice, private notice is permitted.

I am informed by learned Senior Advocate that against the issue of membership and the dispute thereon, the Petitioner - Union has fled a Writ

Petition No. 13141 of 2019 in this Court.

Considering the nature of the dispute, tag Writ Petition No. 13141 of 2019 along with this Petition.