In a writ appeal against a labour court order approving a union's bye-laws, the High Court held the challenging application infructuous due to the merger of the employer company, rendering the union non-existent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Letters Patent Appellate Jurisdiction)
L.P.A No. 44 of 2017
Abhay Kumar Singh, s/o Sri Ram Awadh Singh, r/o Telco Colony, Qr. No. L4/21, F-Road, PO and PS-Telco, Jamshedpur, DistrictEast Singhbhum, Jharkhand. … Appellant
Versus
… Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
For the Appellant : Mr. Anil Kumar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sreenu Garapati, SC-III For the Respondent No.4 : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate --------
O R D E R 14th June 2022
Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, J.
The challenge before this Court by the appellant claiming himself office bearer of T.M.L. Drivelines Workers Union is to the order dated 3rd January 2017 passed in W.P.(L) No. 6691 of 2016 with W.P.(L) No. 5275 of 2015.
2. By the said order, the writ Court held that W.P.(L) No. 5275 of 2015 was rendered infructuous whereas the prayer made in W.P.(L) No. 6691 of 2016 for setting aside the order dated 17th October 2016 as contained in Memo No. 1921 issued by the respondent no.3 was rejected. By order dated 17th October 2016,
2 L.P.A No. 44 of 2017
amendment proposed in the bye-laws of the respondent no.4-Union was accepted and objection of the petitioner was rejected.
3. The writ Court has held as under:
“11. As has been noted herein-above as well, on account of election having been held by the Respondent Union, the writ petition WPL No. 5275/2015 has been rendered infructuous during its pendency. It is accordingly disposed of as such.
12. So far as writ petition WPL No. 6691/2016 is concerned, petitioner has failed to make out a case for interference under powers of judicial review of this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Petitioner however is at liberty to assail the amendment allowed in an appropriate proceeding before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction. The writ petition is being disposed of without interfering in the impugned decision. I.A. No. 8426/2016 seeking intervention also stands disposed. I.A. No. 4089/2016 seeking stay of the proposed election has been rendered infructuous. Accordingly, it is disposed of as such.”
4. Mr. Anil Kumar, the learned Senior counsel for the appellant, submits that the powers under section 3 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 cannot be exercised by a person without an express authority through a Gazette Notification of the State Government.
5. The submission made at Bar is that the Additional Registrar and Deputy Registrar at Jamshedpur could not have approved the bye-laws framed in the year 2014 without an authority of delegation by the State Government and, that too, without published in the Gazette Notification. Therefore, no power on the basis of the Notification issued in favour of Umesh Prasad Singh who was posted as Additional Registrar at Ranchi could have been exercised by the Additional Registrar and Deputy Registrar at Jamshedpur.
6. Mr. Sreenu Garapati, the learned SC-III, informs the Court that now T.M.L. Drivelines Limited has merged with Tata Motors Limited and while so, the Trade Union which was formed for T.M.L. Drivelines Limited is no more in existence.
7. Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, the learned counsel for the respondent no.4, submits that I.A No. 51 of 2019 has been filed to
3 L.P.A No. 44 of 2017
bring on record copies of amended constitution/bye-laws of T.M.L. Drivelines Workers Union.
8. The averments made in this interlocutory application
are as under:
“5. That the deponent states that the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench vide order dated 5th April 2018 has approved the merger and Arrangement between TML Drivelines Limited and Tata Motors Limited. Accordingly, TML Drivelines Limited has merged with Tata Motors Limited with effect from 1st May 2018.
6. That the deponent states that the constitution/bye laws of the TML & Drive Lines Workers Union has been amended and communicated vide letter dated 31.07.2018 issued by the Jt. Labour Commissioner cum Registrar Trade Unions, Jharkhand, Ranchi.
7. That the deponent states that once the M/s TML Drivelines Limited after merger has lost its legal personality, now the challenge to the amended bye-laws of 2016 has lost its relevance more so in view of the amendments carried out in 2018.”
9. There is unanimity at bar that in view of the aforesaid, L.P.A No. 44 of 2017 has been rendered infructuous.
10. Ordered accordingly.
11. I.A Nos. 51 of 2019, 5859 of 2017, 8821 of 2017, 10848 of 2018 and 50 of 2019 stand disposed of.
(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)
(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)
R.K/Amit
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Labour Court had jurisdiction to approve the new bye-laws without a valid Gazette notification delegating power to the Registrar at Jamshedpur.
Whether the mootness of the matter arising from the merger of the employer company affects the propriety of the writ court's decision.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Abhay Kumar Singh
State of Jharkhand
Deputy Labour Commissioner, Jamshedpur
T.M.L. Drivelines Workers Union
Shree Chandrashekhar
Ratnaker Bhengra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
