Dismissed

Rajasthan Anushakti Priyojna Karmchari Sangh v. Union of India

Rajasthan HC4 Sept 2024CW/13729/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a writ petition filed by a trade union challenging the recognition of its opposing office-bearers. The Court held the dispute was artificial, noting the petitioner's President participated in the elections on a signed ballot paper.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed at a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to be deposited with the Litigants Welfare Fund within 15 days.

Rajasthan Anushakti Priyojna Karmchari… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:36769]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13729/2024

¶4

Rajasthan Anushakti Priyojna Karmchari Sangh, Having Its Head Office At Intuc Office, Pratap Circle, Post Bhabhanagar, Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh (Raj.) Through Its Office Bearer President Shri Manoj Kumar Dagur S/oshri Khushi Ram, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of Type -3, 39/f, Anupratap Colony, Post Bhabhanagar, Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Union Of India, Through Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Kendriya Shram Sadan, Haribhau Upadhyay Nagar (Extn.) Pushkar Road, Ajmer 305004

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Registrar Of Trade Union And Additional Labour Commissioner (Ir), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur Having Office At Shram Bhawan, Shanti Nagar, Hasanpura, Jaipur (Raj.) - 302006

¶9

Nuclear Power Corporation Of India Ltd. (Npcil), Through Its Site Director, Rajasthan Atomic Power Station, Unit To 8, Rawatbhata, Rajasthan Site, P.o. Anushakti, Via - Kota.

¶10

The Head, Human Resources (Hr), Rajasthan Atomic Power Station, Unit-1 To 8, Nuclear Power Corporation Of India Ltd. (Npcil), Rawatbhata, Rajasthan Site, P.o. Anushakti, Via - Kota.

¶11

Swaroop Singh Nagar, At Present Working As Senior Technician - H, Mechanical Maintenance, Unit 3 And 4 Rawatbhata - Rajasthan Site, P.o. Anushakti , Via - Kota.

¶12

Rajesh Kumar Bhati, At Present Working As Senior Assistant Grade - Ii, Health - Physics Unist 1 And 2, Rawatbhata - Rajasthan Site, P.o. Anushakti , Via - Kota.

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Manas Ranchhor Khatri
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit Dy. S.G. with
		Mr. Dimple Rajpurohit
		Mr. I.R. Choudhary AAG
		Mr. Vinay Baghmar Asst G.C.
		Mr. KuldeepVaishnav Dy. G.C

¶15

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶16

Order

¶17

04/09/2024

¶18

The present writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:

[2024:RJ-JD:36769]

[CW-13729/2024]

(2 of 5)

“A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the annual return for the year 2022 (Annex-39) filed by the respondent no. 5 & 6 representing them as office bearers of the union may kindly be quashed and set aside and the entry into the record of the register of the respondent no. 2 in this regard i.e. in favour of the respondent no. 5 and 6 may kindly be struck off.

¶23

B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the annual return filed by the petitioner on 05.01.2023 for the year 2022 (Annex-17) may kindly be restored on the web portal i.e. www.l dms.rajasthan.gov.in and in the record of the register of respondent no. 2 showing the entry of the office bearers as per this annual return.

¶24

C. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the representation/ objection filed by the petitioner on 02.08.2024 (Annex-36) and representation dated 31.01.2024 (Annex-30) may kindly be allowed and the name of the office bearers reflected in annual return filed by the petitioner for the year 2023 (Annex-29) may kindly be permitted for the purposes of the information issued to be sent through the respondent no. 1 for elections declared by way of notification on 02.8.2024 (Annex-35).

¶25

D. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to permit the name of the office bearers of the union reflected and shown in the annual return filed for the year 2023 (Annex-29) as representative of the union to participate in the election declared by way of notification issued on 02.08.2024 (Annex-35).

¶26

E. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents no. 5 and 6 may be restrained to participate in the elections representing themselves as office bearers of the union and any such decision taken by the respondents to allow the respondent no. 5 and 6 to participate in the elections for which the schedule has been declared by way of notification issued on 02.8.2024 (Annex-35) may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside.

¶27

F. Any other order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of petitioner.”

[2024:RJ-JD:36769]

[CW-13729/2024]

(3 of 5)

What has been tried to be portrayed on behalf of the petitioner Union vide the present petition is that, the private respondent Nos.5 & 6 have been accepted by the respondent department as representatives of the petitioner Union whereas they are not the representatives of the petitioner Union Rajasthan Anushakti Pariyojna Karamchari Sangh.

¶32

At the inception, learned Dy. S.G. appearing for Union of India as well as counsel appearing on behalf of Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCL) and that for the State, submit that the petitioner i.e. Rajasthan Anushakti Pariyojna Karamchari Sangh, and Indian National Trade Union Congress, Rajasthan (INTUC) are two separate Unions having separate representatives of each. All the three counsels submit that so far as the petitioner Union is concerned, the representatives as mentioned in the communication dated 05.08.2024 (Annex.34) issued by the State, have been recognized by the State Authorities. Counsels submit that there is no dispute regarding the recognition of the representatives of both the unions. They submit that a total fake issue has been sought to be raised in connivance, by both the Unions, to get the elections delayed in one or the other manner.

¶33

To substantiate the submission, today an affidavit has been filed on behalf of the NPCL wherein a copy of the ballot paper, as approved for the upcoming elections has been annexed which bears the signature of Shri Manoj Kumar Dagur in the capacity of the President of the petitioner Union.

¶34

So far as the private respondent Nos.5 & 6 are concerned, it has been submitted that they represent a different Union and

[2024:RJ-JD:36769]

[CW-13729/2024]

(4 of 5)

therefore, there cannot be any dispute regarding the representatives of both the Unions.

¶39

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶40

In the specific opinion of this Court, a total misconceived and fallacious dispute has been sought to be raised vide the present petition.

¶41

As has been admitted by all the three counsels representing the respective respondent departments, the representatives of the petitioner Union have very well been recognized by the State department therefore, the issue as raised, is clearly fake, on the face of it.

¶42

The present dispute being misconceived is also clear from a bare perusal of the ballot paper as approved for the upcoming elections. The same bears the signature of the present petitioner Mr. Manoj Kumar Dagur as the President of petitioner Union. The said signature has not been refuted by counsel for the petitioner. Meaning thereby, the petitioner, who on the one hand has sought to raise a dispute before this Court, is on the other hand, actively participating in the process of the upcoming elections and that too as a President of the petitioner Union.

¶43

So far as the document placed on record today along with the affidavit pertaining to the fact that both the Unions entered into an amicable settlement is concerned, this Court is not even required to go into the said issue as the representatives of the petitioner Union having been recognized by the State Department and the said fact having not been denied, any action/inaction

[CW-13729/2024]

[2024:RJ-JD:36769]

(5 of 5)

between the two Unions is their inter se affair, not amenable to writ jurisdiction.

¶48

In view of the above facts and observations, this Court does not find any ground to entertain the present petition and the same is therefore, dismissed at a cost of Rs.10,000/-.

¶49

Cost be deposited with the Litigants Welfare Fund within a period of 15 days.

¶50

Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of .

¶51

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶52

335-Devanshi/-

Rajasthan Anushakti Priyojna Karmchari Sangh v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajasthan Anushakti Priyojna Karmchari Sangh v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shanti Lal Rampuria Vs Tarachand Jatanlal Rampuria HUF

Lrs. of Mohammad Salim Vs Abdul Rashid

Pemp Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Dilip Sharma Vs Union of India

Ravishankar Singh Vs Lal Singh

Gram Panchayat Manpura Kharda Vs the State of Rajasthan