Delhi State Electricty Workers Union v. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors

G, :K IN THE HIGII COUI{T OF DI|,LI{I AT NII,W DELHI LPA 303 0F 20lL WRIT PET.(C) 4s67 OF 2010 wruT PDT.(C) 4018 OF 2008 Jr.rclgment rescn,ed on: 3.5.20 12 Judgment pronouncecl on: 13.7 .2012

(1) LP A 303/20rr & cM 6477 /2011 DI]LHI VIDYUT KARAMCHAIII UNION . . . AI'PDLLANT Through: Mr. Sumit I(umar, Advocate. \ VERSUS )D | - ' NCT oF DITLHI & ot{s .. .nDSI'oNDENTS 'i Through: Mr. N. Waziri, Standing Counsel (Civil) rvith Ms. Zecnat Masoodi, Advocate for GNCID. Mr. Sudhir Nanclrajog, Sr. Advocate rvith Mr. Vishva Wadhrva. Advocartc for NDPL. Mr. S. K. Dubcy, Mr. Vivck, Advocate for D IL. Mr. Vinay Sabharr,r,al, Aclvocatc for . IPGCL. Mr. I3.K. Sinha, r,vith Ms. Pratibha Sinha, Advocate for R.2 . Mr. S.N. Chatrclhari, Aclvocate for BSES RPL Mr. Mohit Verrna, Advocate for BSES YPL. Mr. V.K. 'I'andon, Aclvocate for Labour Deptt. Mr. K.C. I)ubey, Advocate Ibr DESU Majdoor Sangh.

(2) W.P.n 4567 /2010 DELIII VIDYUT I(AI{AMCIIAIII UNION . . . AI'I'ELLANT V1'/ b T , Lt, A 303t2Q I I, W p.(C) 4567 t20 | O,WP(C) 40 | 8/2008 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. \e )I .J Through: Mr. Sumit I(nmar, Advocate' V]]RSI]S NCT OF DELIII & ORS ... .RESPONDENTS Through: .Mr. N. Waziri, Standing Couusel (Civil) rvith Ms. Zecnat Masoocli, Advocate lbr GNCTD' Mr. Suclhir NandrajoB, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vishva Wadhu'a, Advocate ' for NDPL Mr. S. K. DubeY, Mr' Vivek, Advocate fol D fL. Mr. Vinay Sabhar''uverl, Advocatc for IPGCL. Mr. B.K. Sinha, with Ms. Pratibha Sinha, Aclvocate for Il.2 Mr'. S.N. Chatrclhari, Aclvocate for BS]'S ITI'L Mr. Mohit Vertna, Advocate for BSES YPL. Mr. V.K. Tanclon, Aclvocatc for Labour Deptt. Mr. I(.C. DubeY, Advocate lor DESU Majdoor Sangh.

(3) W.P.(O 4013/2008, cM 9378/201r DELHISTATEELECTIUCITYWORKEITSUNION . . . AI'I'ELLANT Tlrrotrglr:Mr.At<lrilsibal,Mr.ltajeslrPathak fr and Mr' Salinr Amber Itlamclar' Advocates. VERSUS j!- F NCT OF DELHI & OIIS Through: .IIESI'ONDENTS Mr. N. Waziri, Standing Cor-rusel (Civil) r,vith Ms' Zecnat Masoocli, Advocate for GNCTD. LpA 303/201 I. wP.(c) 4567/201o,wP(c) 401 8/2008 ,F V\\A t'i Mr. Suclhir NandrajoE, Sr. Advocate lvil.h Mr. Vishva Waclhrva, Adrtocatc for NDPL. Mr. S. K. DubeY, Mr. Vivek, Aclvocate fol D'I'L. . Mr. Vinay Sabharrval, Aclvocate for . IPGCL. Mr. B.I(. Sinha, r.r'ith Ms' Pratibha Sinha, Aclvocate for R.2. Mr. K.C. DubeY, Advocatc DESU Majdoor Sangh. CORAM:- HON'BLE TI{E ACTING CHIEF JUSTICI'] HON'BLE MII. JUSTTCE RAJIV SAIIAI IINDLAW ^'' A.I( SIKRI, ACTING CIIIEF JUSTICE For orclers' see LPA 2831201r' ba)^,,,,f rL ,t t-t, I II'LLl-for ACTING CIIIEII JUSTICID (RAJIV SAI{AI ENDT,AW) JUDGID JULY 13,2012 skb (-9 a LpA 3O3l2Ol l, wP.(c) 4s67l201O,wP(c) 4018/2008 lNTFIEEtrxcx.nCoUl{T.oF'DEI,MI,{'r}{]l'\ryl}-E[,Il!l -l-tr I'}A 283 ()1F 20'1L I,r'A 303 0F 2011 WR.IT'r',E'['.(a) 4567 C)F 20tr0 WRIT PET.(C) 4018 OF 2008 J [JNtrON . . " APPlltr,x,AN'.[' Mr. Itaicsh Pathak Anrbcr Inatnclzrr, Juclgmcnt rescrvecl orl : 3'5'2012 t l.,df*ent protrouucerl otr: I 3 '1 '2012 %

(1) T-,P A 2E31201J" cNI' 6\27 /20LL" 92\912{JL1 DtrI,HI STAT'E EI,ECTR.ICITI Tirrougb: Mr" Akhil Sibarl' zrncl Mr' Salim Advocatcs' VI'ITSUS IdC.[- OF'DItrtr,HX & ORS 'fhtough: LPAr.srzorl.LPA303/2-0|l'wP'(c)4567/2010.V/P(C),|013/200.q " [{ ttlS'Xl()f{ lD [']' N'l'S Mr. N. War,ir\, Slaurclirrg Cor-rrrscl iC*iU rryilh Ms' 7'ccnaL Marsoocli' Aclvocatc for GlrlC' t'D' Mr. Sr-rclhir Narnclraiog, Sr'.Aclvocatc *i ft Ml. Vislrval Wn'clllrva" Aclvoctrtc for NDPL. Mr. Il.K. Siul-ra, witlr Ms' Przrtibha Sinha, Aclvo<;artc lol It'2 Mt .S. K. [)trbcY' Mr'. Vivcl<' Aclvocarte for l)'J' l'' ftft. Vi"^y Satrberr-watl' Aclvocartc lbr IPGCI,. Mr. S.N. Clratrclhau'i" Aclvoczrtc 1'or I]SNS IU'I, Mt. Mohit Vcrt'tra, Aclvocatc tbr BS]1S YPI,. Mr. V-K. 'l'zrnclotr, Aclvocartc LoI Labour l)ePtt' fufr. K.C. I)ubcY' Achrocatc lbr' Dlisll Maj cloor Sarr gh' l)age 1 of 37 \,tb o

(2) l,pa sosl?olr s cn{ 0+zzlzoll DI'xJFlxvxDYUT,KAI{AMCFIAIIJUNI0I{"""AIIP['L{.AN.J[. . Through: Mr' Surnit l(utlar' Acivocate' VEITSI]S NCT OF DtrLIfl & ORS iI, " ' "RXTSPONN}XDN'IS Through: Mr' N' \'{ar'iri' Stancling'- Cottnscl iCr"ifl iruittt tvtt ' Lecnat" Masoocli' Aclvocate tor GN(J'ID. Mr. Suclhir Nanclrajog' Sr' Ac'lvocaLe with Mr - Visln'a Werdhwa' Aclvocate fol N[)PL' Mr-S. K' I)r-rbcY' Mr' Vivck' Aclvocate lor D'f] '' 'Mr'. Vinay Sabharwarl' Ac{vocartc 1-or IPGCI.. Mr-B.I(' Sinha, witli Ms' Pratibha Sinha, Aclvocatc tbr tl'2 Mr. S.N' Clrauclheu-i' Aclvocartc for ISSES RI)I, Mr. Moirit Vcrntar' Aclvocatc lor BSBS YPI,. Mr. V'K' 'fzrudou' Aclvocarte lbr I.abottt DePtt' Mr. K'C' I)r'rbcY' Aclvocalc lor DIISIJ Maj cloor Szrn gh'

(3) W.F"(C) 4s67l20x0 DEI,H]I VIDYUT I(AIT.AIWC}XAITI IJNION ' ' ' AtrINNE'T.,I-ANT ' Through: Mr' Surnit I(unlar' Aclvocatc' VERSUS LPAzs:lzotl'LPA303/20||.wP'(c)4567/201O'wP(c)40|32008 Page 2 ol 37 NCT' OF I}EI-Ifi & OI{S 'fhrough: Mr N w uz*it,tl;1,;'?|"ttTll' ?ci"iil with Ms ' 4'cent.l Masoocli' Aclv ocatc fol' GNCI'|D' iutr. Snanir Nanclrajog' Sr' A'clvocate with Mr' Vishva Werclltwa' Aclvocertc for NDPL. iat. s. K. I)ubcY' Mr' Vivck' Aclvocatc for I)TI'' Vtr. Vinuy Sabharrvai' Aclvoczrte -[or IPGCI,. Vft. B.f<. Sinlta, rvitlr Ms' t'}i'atibha Sinha, Aclvocartc for ll'2 fuft. S.N' Charuclhzu'i' Aclvoczrtc for BSI]S RP], M; Mohit Vctttler, Advoczrl"c [or' q Labour DePtt' ilt. K-C.' I)ubcY, Aclvocartc for DIISIJ Maj cloor S) anglr' DEr,Fxr srATE En trcrl{rcrrY WORr(xx*u "^::Tpn}Fln,r,AN'f Through: Mr' Aiftii Sibal' Mr' Itajcsh Pathark ;; Mt. Salinr Ambcl lnanrclar' Advocates. BSES YI)I.. Mr. V.K. 'fatlclou, Aclvocartc lor '1. V]]RSUS NCT OF'DELFIX & ORS. Througlr: LPAzgrlzotl'LPA303/20|r.wn.1c;4567/20|0.wP(c)40|8/2008 .R]ITSPONX}EINTS Mr. N. Waziri, Stancling - Cor'rnscl (Civii) with M't' /'ecntt: Mztsoocli' iauo.nt. for GNC'I"D' Vft. S"df.ir Nandrajog' Sr',Aclvocate *ltft Mr. Vishver Wzrclhwzr' Aclvocarte

(4) w.P \ /. t$ for NDPI,. i;;. s. K. I)ubcY, Mr' vivck' Aclvocate for D'l'l'' ftfri. Vinuy Sabhann,al, Ac{vocatc for IPGCL. ff4r'. p.f<- Sinhzr', with Ms' Pratibha Sinha, Aclvocatc for I{'2' M. k.C. I)ubcY, AclvocaLc for DIISU Majcloor Sanglr' COI{*\NI :- HON'tsX.,E TFTtr ACTING CFIItrF' J{JSTNCII E{ON'EX,IIIWR.JIJSTICEI{AJtrVSAI-trAIENDLAW :,, l..fhesefourseparateptoceeclings,twoWritPetitiorrstrtrdtwol,etlers Patent Appeals, have comrnonality o'[ issues zrucl. thcro-[orc czlll bc discr,rsscd, adudicated" upon ancl clecided by Lhis cotumon jtrclgrllctlL' z. .the Delhi State Electricity Workers Union (hcrcinarftcr rcfcrrccl to as theDSI]WIJ)isthepetitionerinWritPctition(C)4018/2008zrncl[[rc appellant in LPA 2B3;20II-writ Petition (c)456712010 is filcct bv Dclhi victyr-rt l(ar-mchari union (Regcl.) ( hereinafter. refcrrccl to as thc DVKrD' the DVKU is also the appellant in I,PA 3031201I. .llrc sr-rbjec|. rnattcr o.[ these four.proceeciings is as undet:- LPAzarzotl.LPA303/20ll.wP.(c)456?/20|O,wP(c)40|8/2008 l)age 4 ol'37 uq .fhe DSI:wu has filecl this appeal iinpugning thc orcler claLecl 2I.2.2011 passecl by the leanrecl single Judge in writ Pctition 416312'010 wlrichwasfileclbytherespondentno.2i.e.NDPI.,StalfAsstlciation (hercinafter referrecl to as 'the Staff Association')' 'fhc Starff Association hacl filecl this writ petition for concl'cti'g eiectio' foi the plrrpose of grziul. ofrecognitiontomajorityunionrestr.ictedtotheNDPI,orrly.IrrLlriswriL petition, the appellant.DSEWlJ was not irnpleadecl zrncl was' thctclclrc' not lrearcl. 'fhe orcler clated 2t'2'20I1 was passecl by thc lczunccl Single .r J'clge crirecting trre NDpL to co'd.uct the cicctiorl as praryccl for by Lhe staff Association within til'ee months' It',s a brief orclcr of on'e pzrragraph wilich reads as uncler:- "'fhe only relief sought in the writ pctiticn ls zr ' clirection to tll" resporiclents to concluct.,elccti3t] fin' ' th.e puqlose of grant of recognition to tlic nrajorily of Trade Unioi in respondent No'2 Cotrrirartry' ' Learnecl Senior Counsei appearing for resiponclcnt No.2 states that the responclent is prcllarccl to concluct the electiou' In view of the above, respondent No'2 is dirccted to concluct election as prayecl for witliin tlrrcc months fiom todaY' With this clirJctiot, tlt" writ petition' is clisposccl , of." 'Jihe grievance of the DSEWIJ is that thc orclcr was passccl withottt rrearing the appelrant which is the rccog'izccr 'rajority unicln .r workc's LPA2s3/20ll.LPA303/20|l.wP'(c)qsozlzoto'wp(C)4018/2008 rcprcsentingworkersnotonlyofNI)PLbrrtthecntircirrcltrstrysupplyirrg thc porver to NC.f of Delhi of which five companics rratrrclY IPGCI,, Dcllri .lRANSCO,NDPL,BRPLanclBYPI,formairart.'flrescfivccolrrlranics (rcsponcient nb.3 to 7 .i* LpA) are the slrccessors of t'c crstwlrilc Dclhi Viclyut Boarcl (DVB) wlriclr was reorganizecl aS pcr tlre Dcllri ltc|orrirs Act, 2000'ItisclairnedthattlreDSEWIJwasrecognizectbytlrct)Vl3as rn4jorityrinionancllrastlreriglrttoseektlrisrccogrritiorrbytlrcNl)P[.,as ure, onthe basis of majority i'the incrristry a'ct it shor-rrcr not bc rcstr:ictccl to NDPI, aione' . Writ Petition (C) 40X'8/2008: 'ThispetitionisfiledbytheDSF,WUclaitrlstlrcszrtrrcrclic|lrasccl onspecificpletlratitwasarecognizeclmajorilyrrnionirrLlrccrstwlriic DvB and all the successors companies were bouncl to trcgotiatc withLhis rjnion in goocr faitir and also seeks quashing of lcttcr clartccl l1'12'2007 issucd by the Delhi TRANSCO Ltct. a'cl I'chaprastha powc'Gc.cral co' Ltcl. (IPGCL) as pel which neither DVKU nor f)sliwtJ rvzis eligilrlc Lo be v! recognized as rnajority union referring to the provisiotr o[ scctiort22 (2) of tlre Traclc Union Lct,1926' Wnit Fetition (C) 4567/20X'0 flrispetitionisfiledbyDVl(tJseekingawrit/orclcr/c{ircoliorrLo|,hc r.esponclents trrerein, parlicularry the crrief r,erbour co'rn,.issi.'cr Dclhi to LPAzsllzotl.LPA303/2011'wP.(c)4567/20Io.wP(O4018/2008 5l holcl elections by sccret bailot to deter'rine the 'rajoriry crrzrrarctcr of thc union f'nctio'ing in the 5 companies, ancl furlrrer a nranclzurns to thc fivc corupanies to reco gn\ze the union which woulcl bc clcclzirccl ers rrrajority union. DStswlJ, responclent no'B in the saicl writ petitiou' lrers filccl zr rcply' sr"ri:porting the demaud fol cleterminatiol of a rccog'izccl lrzr'iority t-ttriou across the five successol-companies, as per the principrc oi "onc I'clr-rstry-One lJnion"' tr tr'A 303/201n Tlrisai:pealarisesoutofthesanrcordcrsclatccl2|.2.2011pzrsseclby { the lea'red single Juclge in writ Petition (c) 416312010 'raking sart,c plca as tnaclc by the DSEWU in LPA 2B3|20II'

¶3Ilrorn tirc gist of the afotesaid proceeclings' it wor'rlcl bc clcar that the iss'e in a, these cases is cornrnon na*r.ery after trrc i^corporatiorr of fivc successor5 colnpanies of DVB' whether clccl-ions shor-rlcl bc helcl ,,i.dustry-rryise,, i.e i' r'espect of all the five establishr.cut zrtrcl ertry union whichemerges as nrajority union 'inclustry-wisc' shourlcl bc givcn thc -r. recognition?, It is for. this reason, order clatecl 2g-3'20r1 wars. paissccl clubbingbotlrtlrewrit.petitionsaswcllasthel,PAs[olrclrcarrcltogetlrcr.

4.J:ortlresakeofconvenienceatldwitlroutany.lczrroIcotrtrarc{ictiotrs, we may take note of facts in LPA 28312011 which rvas trczrlccl as thc lcad LPAzs:120t,.,-ooror,'utl'wP'(c)4567/201O'wP(c)4018/2008 PageT ol37 casc inastluch as lacts of this case w-ould covcr other cases as well' thc Jarcturerl Position in 5/ \ri

5..Tlre.DSWEUisafegistel.ecl.l.racleUnionernclclaitrrstlralitcatrre into existence in the year rg4i ancr rras bec' rcprcscnti*g tlro.uiarrcls o' workers of the Delhi Electric Supply unclertaking whiclr wzrs latcr ou convertecr irto DvB. The DswEu arso boast that it hars bcc'rc'rcscnti'g the woikers with various cotnpanies zrfter the DVB wars unbttndlcd zrncl hars been recognizect in various electiolls as a rnajority uuion wilh er solc.zrucl absolr,rte righl of collective bargaining with r:egarcl to thc intcrcst of LI'rc 'stelectiotrforclctcrrliriirrgtlrcr'rrajority workers of erstwhile DVB' La character of the uniott in DvB has been concluctccl by Lhc Il'egisLrar of .fr.acre rJnio's in the yeur rggg and tirereafter there rras bccn no clcctiorr to dctermi'e the rnajority character o[ union worki'g wit. DVI]' sii'cc tlr'c' rritY chatacter of thc DSWIitJ' nobocly has challenged dre ma'1c

6.on28.l0.2000,GovernmentofNCTofDelhi|rzrcl[ormcc.|apolicy to lestructr-rre DvB for the purpose of restoring opcrntiorrarl ancl financial viability, and to meet the f'ture clemancl for sufficic^t s'p'ty of clcctriciLy' sincc the employees, engineers and officers of DvL] wcrc zrpprchcnsivc about their retreirchtlent/service conclitions ol1 restructltring' thc government, entered into the Triparlitc Agleemetrt with Dclhi ViclyLtt LPAzsrlzotl.LPA303/201r'wp'(C)4567/2010'wP(c)40|8/2008 f Page B of 37 j Boarcl a1d Delhi Viclyut Boarcl Joint Action Counlittec; wbich wab notified by the Depaltment of Power' Delhi on 16' I '200I ' Intlreyeat2002,theDVBwasunbundlectitrtclfivcSLlcccssor .cornpanies unclel the Delhi Electricity Refolms Act' 2000 wlricli Lool< over the generatiol, transinission and distribution' busincsscs tltat wcrc czrrlier carried out by DVB. The new entities wclc : lnclraprasthzr Powcr Ge'eration co. Ltd. (IPGCL) for trre generation bursircss, Dclhi 'l'ransco I-tcl. (D'fL) for the transmission business, and llsEs Yartnttnzr Powcr I'Lcl' (BYPI.), BSI]S Itajdlrani Power I.tcl. (BRPI,,) ancl NorLlr Dcl|ri Power I,tc|.

(NDPL)[.nowrenatnedasTataPowerDelhiDistribLrtionl'tcl'('I?DDI')l for the clistribution business-BI{PL and BYPI'' al'c sr-rbsiclierrics of Lhc Rciiancc Group while TPDDL is a subsictiary of 'fzrtzr powcr LLcr., Dclhi Power corporation Ltd. (DPCL) was set trp in'ter a'If'a' Lo takc ovcr sonrc of trie riabilities of DvB. "frre e'rployees of erstwrrilc DvrS rvhcl wc'c eau'lier involved with the consolidated functioning of thc clcctricity inch"rstry consisting of an the activities of generation, tra'smissio' a'cr clistrib'tion' s\ .i --- .lltccl arbove have now been transfelred to the sllccessof cotl]panics l'llcntl( wlricharecarryingoutspecific|uirctiorrsofgcncrzrtiott,transtrrissiorlor distribution. LPA zsrzo t i .LpR so:lzo t I ' wP'(c) 4567/201 0'wP(c) 401 8/2008 \{ 7 . It is cicar that five separate companies arc incorporartccl r"rnclcr the Indian cornpanies Act having their inclependent cutitics' Al1cr the ' 'r' these establishment waut their affairs to bc rcgr-rlartccl incorPorattot inclepenclent of each other inciucling setvice conclitions oI the euployees' Nodorrbt,theerstwlriieemployeesofDVBwclctakenbytlrcscfive establisrrments on the same terms ancl conclitiorrs of servicc with which trrey were goveined by the DvB, according to trrern trrcr"c is ro errrbargo i' .layingclownsepalatcanddifferenttcrmsandconclitiorri;|orthccrnployees inclucted" by these cotnpanies of their own after 2000' Accorcling to thc '-. .lting with the five cstabli.slrnrcrrts for wclfarre DSWITU it kcPt ou negotre colrective bargaining of trre workels of these rrve csr-arblisrrnrc'ts wrio wcre/ale its members and it shows that alr tbcsc cstzrbrisrrr'c't hacl recognizecl the DSWEu' It is statecl that some elccLions wcrc concltrctcd in the yeur 2004 in the union' where onc Mr' I(uldccp 'Kuuar' 'wels elccted as General secretary. I{owe'er, thereafter trrc l)crhi 'l't{nNsco andGENCO(IPGCL)stoppeclnegotiatingwitlrtlrcDSWl'itJanc|issr-rcd d Circulars. Aggrieved'by such attitude and circultirs' tltc DSWlitl {llecl w'P.(C).4oIBl200Bfor.dir.ectionLotheGI]NCOzrrrc|Dcllri.frzrnscol,td. to ncgotiate with the DSWEu rreing recognizccl n'rajority union' As poirrtecl out above, DI(U also filed w.P.(C) 4567|2()10 |or. conclr-tct of tlre electio' in ail the five companies to cleternrine the majority in zrll t'e lJvc LPAzs:lzot|.LPA303/201t'wP.(C)4567/201().wP(c)40|8/2008. l'age 10 of 37 {' { colnpallies cumttlatively to cletertnine the inajority chararclcr in LIrc inclustly aud not establishmenl wise' 'I hese facts are sufficient to detertlinc the controvcl'sy ancl of coLlfsc some other-facts would be noticed while taking notc of subnrissjons of the various Parties. B'Circularclalecls'I.2ooT,tlrevalidityofwlriclrischzrllerrgccl, mentions that neither DVKU nor DsEWu was cligiblc to bc rccognizecl as 'rajority union beceiuse of the provisions of secti onzz (2) of rlrc'lrercle UnionAct.'ChallengingtlrestandtakenintircsaiclCirculzrr,Mr.Sibal argued that a bare perusal of section Yz(z)olearly slrows tlrzrt Lhc irasis of the Letter clated II.I2.2007 andthe circular ciatecl 8'i'2007 is cntircly erfoneolrs. The saicl section reclui'res officc bcarct's o[ tlr'c lJnion to be engagecl or einployed in the establishrnent ot "inclustry" with which thc .frade union is concerned. It is subnittecl, trrat the srzrtutoriry llcocssary .pelcentageofofficebearersofDSI]WUalecngagcclinorconncctcctwitlr .theinciustrysrpplyingelectricitytotheNC.lofDclhi,beirrgcrstwlrile ernployees of DVB. In any event, urcler-the'fraicle t,nions Act i^ t.c cvcnt ofanyviolationofanyoftlreprovisionso[tlrcA.cttlrcl{cgisLraris elnpowel.edtocanceltlreregistralionwlrichisartrappca.lzrblcotclcl.arssuclr any a'egation that Sectionzzis being vioratccr is to be rzrisecl bcrorc tile LPA zaraor I.LPA 303/201 l. WP.(C) 4s67l2010'wP(C) 40lB/2008 Page LL ol 37 rtegistrar.for appr.opriate action ancl cannot be r-csortec{ to r-uriratererily by IpGcL and DTL without following any principles of natural jr'rstice to scl[- scrvingly declarc tirat the appellant union is not aclhcring to Scclion 22' Iinrther, by the Cilcuiar dated 8'I'2001 lcacl withtlrc lctter clzrtccl fi.12.2007 IPGCL ancl DTL purport to exclr"rde the zrppcllant uniotr frotT recognition'on the glound that its members/office bearcrs arrc not cnrployed .byIPGCLtr).IL.Assuch,thesaidcircularan'cllctLerisintlrctccLlro[ Section zz o.ftrre ltacle union Act and lurthcr ar'onnts to zrn I-Jnfaiir Labour Practice undel the inclustrial Disputcs Act znlcl 5sel( t() ricgzrtc 'a entirely trre rigrrt to collective bargaining at trrc lcvci o[ industry. main is.sue pertaining to rccognition o[ majolity Lrade industry is concernecl, Mr' Sibal aclvzrncecl thc following iL

¶9Insofal as union across the propositions:-

(i)Inlaw,andinprinciple,tirerecanbcrccognitiotrclftr majority trade union acloss an inclr'rsLry lartlrer than only .' in respect of a constituent unit of strch incltrstry'

(ii)oncethefirstpropositionisacccptcc|,itwillclcpcnclotr :ir thc facts and circumstances o[ ar particularr. calsc aurcl itrciustryastowlrethertlreappropriatebargarinirrgr'rrrit.for o recognition of a trade union is the inclust'y ars a rvholc or a constituent thereof or both' .(iii).flre'essenceoftradeuniotrrepresentzrliorriscol.lcctive bargaining'Consequen'tly'thegrcatertlrccollcctivc'Lhc LPA283/2011'LPA303/20ll,wP.(C)4567/20|0.w1,(())4018/2008 Page t2 of 37 t1 ! grcater the b.argaining power' As such' rccognitiotr of-il nrajor.ityunionacrossanitrclustryisttlbcpl.cfcr.rcc|ttl recognitionatthelevelbfitscotlstitucnttrtrits.

(iu) Industry, as a reievant and appropriate bargarining uuit' | ... finds some statutoty recognltlon'

(v) In the absence of a clear statutory tlattdartc or prescriptionisastotracleunionrecognitiotr,itisleftupt the courts to resolve clisputes in this rcgzrrcl' aud to enforce the right of worlters to collectivc berfgzrining' (.oi) Recognition of zr tracle union is a mattcr of riglrt 'fur wolkersandtoSomeextentcopptrlsion.[orthccmployct.. It woulcl be disastrous,to leave tlre clroicc o,[ rccognitiorr to thc u'fettered discretion of the empioycl zrs tbat woulcl result in unfair labour ptactices'

(vii)Itistheriglrtofworkerstobereprcscntcclbyarnrajor.ity u'ion. .fo considef such majority charactcr, tlrc irrch'rstry rather than the establisirment is thc prcferablc bargarining unit.

(viii) In the facts and circumstances of this casc tlrc zrppropriartc bar.gainingunitistlreinclustryanclnotceiclrcottstitLrcnt company.

(ix)Tlrecomi11onandcollectiveintctcstofcx-DVI] employeesabsorbeclintotlresuccessorcntitjcsiscvidctlt frotntlreDelhiElectricityReforrrrsAct,2000asalsotlrc fripartiteAgreementdatccl16.I.20lI.'I.ircpowcro.[- CoilectiveBargainingacrosstlrefivecnt.iticstoprotccL this common intetest is a natriral corollary' LPA zsilzot I,LPA i03/201 l-wP'(c) 4s67l2010'wP(c) 40l8/2003 Page L3 of 37

(x) An election, under the supervision ancl clircctiorl o[ a Cor-yt appoillecl officer, should tfiele1brc bc hclcl ercross ail five su.ccessor entities to iclentily arncl rccognizc tlrc rnajority union across the industry'

(xi) If this Courl feel that there should be aclditionarlly be recognition, in terils of the cocle of Disciplinc, iu rcspcc;L of each sllccessor entity, the appellerut i.s not avctsc t<l the sarre plovidecl there is an appropriatc cletlarcation Lo avoicl conflict.

¶10FIe supplementecl these submissions with legal propositiotrs, zrrguitrg that collective bargaining by workers is an anticlotc 1o Lhc inlbrior $argaining position of inclividual workers, i1 Lhc enrployct'-worker reiationsirip i1 industry. I{is subgrission rryas that collcctivc barrgairlilg should.be encouraged at i'clustry level which was zrlso tltc 'rernclerLc oI ll'O and the spirit behind'fiade unions Act as well as lnclustrierl Disp.rlc Act' I{e referrecl to the judgment of the suprerne court i, Iroocl corltorati'rn qf Xndia Stftff [Jnio* Vs. irooel Corp. of Indiu 1995 stlpp(l) SCC 67u whercin the Suprenre Coutl hacl gonc to thc cxtcnt o{ calJigg 'collcctivc bar.gaining' the raison d.etre of tracle utdons, observing as uncJcr:- c(...Collectivebargairrirrgistlreprirrcipallaisot.t cl'etre of the tracle utlions. I{owevcr, to scc that tlrc trade union, which talkes rqr 1he tnattcr concctning service conditions of thc workmeu trurly rcpfcsctlts; thc workmen cmployecl in thc establishtrrcnt, thc tracle rinion is first rcquirccl to gct itsclf rcgistcrcd LPA zs:lzotI.LPA 303/2011' wP.(c) 4-s67l201o'wP(c) 4018/2008 Page L4 of 37 # fl under the provisions of 'I-rade lJnious Act, J926' This gives a statnp of due fortnation of thc traclc union and assures the mind of the cmploycr that the tracle union is an zruthenticated body; thc namcs and occupation of whose officc bczucrs alscr becorne known. But when in an establislrntcttt, bc it ah industry or an undertakiirg, thcrc zrtc lllol'c than one'registered tlade unions, the qucstion as to with whom the employer should ne$otiaLc or enter into bargaining assulnes importance, bccausc if thc tracle union claiming this right be one whiclr has zrs its rnembers minorrty of the workmcn/cnrployccs, the 'seillement, evetl if any arlived bc[wect't thc ernployers ancl such a unions, ma)/ not bc acceptable to the majority and may not resull ilr inclustrial. peace. I1 such a situation with w|otn th.c employers shoulct bargain, or to put it diffcrcntly rvht shotild be the sole bargai'i'g agcnt, hars bccrr a matter of discussion ancl solne clispr-rtc. 'l.hc 'check off system' rvhich once prcvailcd i.n this clomain has lost its appeais; and so, cllorts etro on to find or_rt which other system can foot the bill. The rnethod of secret ballot js beirig graclr-rally accepted. A11 concetrred would, howovcr, likc to see that this method is so adapted ancl acljustcd LliarL it reflects the correct position al; rcgarcls; member-ship of the differeut Jracle uuious opcratilg in one and the same inclustry, cstablishrncut or undeflaking. 1 1. Referring to alothel jr-rdgmcnt Viruelhaclaslum Vs. Manugement of Lotus stibmissiol't was that the Supretne Coutl indiviclr-ral wotlanan had by thetnselves of Suprcrnc Colrrt ir-r I'' Nfills, (1998) I SCC 650 his recognizcd in tlrarl casc that scanl [rargziining Power aucl therefore their disputes hacl to be liighlightect by their barrgaining etgct'tts, LPAzsttzot t.LPA 303/201 l. wP.(c) 4567/2010,wP(c) 40l8/2008 nanely, tlreir uni.ons representing tlre body of wclrl<trrcn So tlrat tlrc bargaining power of individlal worlanell can get strclgthcnccl' 11 thc saricl case, alter taking note of various provisions of the lnclustrial Disputes AcL' the court described the principle of collective bargaining in thc following lllanner:- p "9. It has to be kept in view that the Act is barsed "" ift" principle of collective bargaining lor resolving^industrialdisl:rrtcsandforrrraintarinirig inclustrial peace. Thus plinciple oI inclustrial democracy is the becl-r'och of thc Act' 'l'hc ffitoy"l: or a class of employers oll the oue hancl urrd tnl accredited representatives o[ thc u'otktlcn on the other ur" ""pJ"tccl to resolve the inclusttiai li;p;" amicably u, fut as possible by' entcring into the settlement outside the tonciliatiop pt occcditrgs ;; if no settletnent is reached and thc clispt-ttc reaches conciliator even during cotrcilizrtion pro*"ai"gt. In all these negotiations basccl on collective balgaining inclividual worklrrzur necessatily r"""Ies in backgrounct' 'Ihc rcins o[ bargaining on his behalf is hancled ovci-to thc union representing such wolkmau' 'fhc tttrions espouse the common caltsc on bchalf of aril thcir mcmbers. Consequently, settletlcnt zurivocl at by thern with manai"rnent woulcl bincl at lcast thcir rncrnbers and if si"h settlement is arfived at during conciliation proceeclings, it would b.ind,cvcn non-members. Tl',-t-t,, setllctnents. are thc livc wlrcs under the Act for ensuring inclustrial pcacc ancl fiorp"rity. Section 10(2) oftht Act highlights tlris poriiion by provicling that where thc i:artics to atr ' inclustrial clispute appiy in the presclibcct lr'latnncr' *h"tn"r jointly or s"pzuutely, for a refcrcncc o'[thc dispute to u gou'cl, tourt, Lubot-tr Court' 'fi'itrunzrl ol National Tribunal, the approptiate Governtrtcttt' if satisrred that the persons applying lcprcsont thc LPA zs:lzot I.LPA 30i/201 l. wP'(c) 4s67l2010'wP(c)4018/2008 b\, ! rnajority of each party, shall. nrakc thc relbrellce accorclingly.Individ.ualworttrrancolnesirrtotlrc . picture oltiy itt connection with a limitcct class of inclustrial iisputes as inclicatecl by Sccrion 2A of the Act aeating witJr clischarges, clistrrissals, . retrenchmentsorother.wiscterrninatiotrofscrvices of a1 inclividqal worktlan. Save aucl cxcept thc aforesaicl class of disputes, which an inclividr'ral workmancanraise,restoftheinclustrialclisprrtcs including clisputes pertaining to illegal lock ot"tt' lay-off "and ^lay-off compensation lravc to bc ' filtered thlough the llrocess of coltectivc bargaining ancl they are disputes of gcneral naturc or ciass Jisp'tes wherein i'dividual wor-k'rarn by hirnseifhasnosay.IrrtlrisconnecLiorl,itis profitabletokeepinviewadecisiorro[tlrt.cc-mernber Bench oi thir court in thc carsc of llarn PrasaclVishwakarrnaV.Chairrrrarr.Irr.cltrstrizrl 'fribunal, Patna and Ors', (1961)II'LJ504SC wherein Das Gupta, J', speaking for this Cor-rt:t maclethefollowingpertirrentobser.valionsontlrc scheme of the Act, at the tirne when Scction 2A was not on the statute book : '.Itjsllow.wellsettledtlrataclisprrtcbctr,vccnatr individualrn'orkmananclancmployercannotbcan irrclustrialdispr-iteasdefineclinScctiorr2(lc)o|tlrc Industriai Disputes Act ttuless it is takcn LU) by a Union of th; worknren or by a considerarblc nttmber of workmen' In Central Provinccs rranspor[ServiceLtcl.V.I{aglrtrnath(iopzrl., ( 1 957)ILL 127 SC, Mr. Justice venkalarauuar Ayyzrr Spealting fbr the CourL pointecl ot-tt aftcr consicleringnrtlnelousclecisionsintlrisrrratl.crthat the prepon?".u,l"" of jLrclicial opinion was clcarly infavouroftlreviewtlrataclisptrtcbctrvccnatr ernployer and a single employec caunot per sc bc aninclrrstrialdisilutebutitrnaybeconrcorrcifitis taken up by a Union or a num'ber of w-ori<nrcn' ,Notwiihstanding that the languagc of scction 2(l<) is wicle enough to covcl' disputcs bclwcctr aill etlirioyer ancl a single employee"' obscrvcd thc LPAzsslzotl,LPA303/2011'wP.(c)4567/201o,wP(c)'1018/2008 PageLT of37 iearn"cl Juclge, "th-e scheme of thc Iuclustrial Disputes Act does appear to conteurplatc Lhat thc machinery provided therein should bc sct in rnotion to settle only clisputes which involvc thc lights of workmen as a class and that er clisputc tJuciring the individual rights of a wolknran wers not intended to be the subject of acljudicatiotr uuder' the Act, when the sanie had not been tal<cn up by the Union or a nunrber of worictnen'' 'fhis view which has been 1e-affirmecl by thc Cclurl-in several later ciecisions recognises Lhc grctrt i*port*ce in modern inclustrial life of collcotivc baigaining between the worktleu atrcl thc "rrfloy"rr. It is well lanowu horv before thc clays o[ coiiective bargaining labour was art iit grcaL disaclvantage in obtai'ing reasoirablc tcrms lor contracts of service ftotn his cmployer' As trzrdc unions cleveloped in the counlry and collcctivc bargaining became the rule the employers for"rncl it necessary ancl convenient to cleal with thc' ,"irr"r"niatives of worlanen, instead of incliviclual workman, hot only for the making or nroclification of contracts but in the tuatter of takilg clisciplinary action against olle or more rvorkmcn etnd tls tegards all other disPutes' The necessary corollary to this is Lhat thc indiviclual *oiL*u' is at uo stagc a parLy to thc industrial clispute incleilenclently of thc ljnion. 'l'hc LJnion or those wbrkmen 'who havc by thcir' sponsoringturnedtheirrclividr-ralclislrtrtcitrtozrn ' inclustriai dispute, can thereforc claim to ^liavc a ' say in the concluct of the proceedings before thc Tribunal. ItisnotunrehsonabletothinktlratScctiorr36o[ thc Industrial Disputes Act recbgniscs tlris , fosition, by providing that.lhe worknatr who is er pafly to a dispute shall be en[itlccl to bc iepresented by ut officer of a registcrcc{ treiclc ,tttiott of which he is a ttlember""" Page L8 of 37 LPAzg:lzoll.LPA303/20ll.wP.(c)4s67/201o,wP(c)4018/2008

¶12In adclition, his subrnission that in section 2 (ra) "unlair labor-tr practice,,is crefi'ecr as any of the practices specirrecl i' trre Irifth schedulc' fhe Fifth schedure to trre Act, in part I crause 15 e*'reratcs ars ilr ''fair labour practice the action of the employers or tradc uuions cll-cnrploycls' "to refuse to bargai[ collectively, in good faith with tlrc rccognizcd tracle unions". Such unfbir labour practice is specifically prohibitccl by Scction 25't ofthe Act and tlade puni''hable undcr Section 25lJ of the AcL'

¶13On the basis of that his submission is that the purrl:osc of colleetivc bar-gaining is best sclved if the eutire collective speal<s in one voicc' I_Iowever, this may not be achievabre in practice ancl rrc'cc it is irrpc'ativc that the rnajority view is accepted by 16s enlire collcctivc. 'r'his c.nccpl of prajolity lule aS parl' of .industriai clemocracy filcls rccognition in the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ' Particr-rlarly' ' witlt rcspect to a settlement arrived at in the collrse of concilizrtio' procccdi'gs, scction I0 (2),10A(3A) reaclwith section 18(3) (d) which tnaudatc tlrzrt lhc etction !> of the rnajOrity wiil bind the minority, as also futurc workcrs' llc iilso argued thht the role of a recogni zecllmajority urion rvats cmphasizccl cvcn bytlreNationalComrrrissiononLabourinitsreportin1967.

¶14Proceecling there from, Mr. Ilibal arguccl" that ottcc rccogtrition majority union is accepted as a logical necessity for giving clfcct to LPAzs3/20ll,LPA303/20ll,wP.(c)4567/201o'wP(c)4018/2008 of llre statutory mandate , the next step is to cletermiue the scopc ancl cxtcrrl of recognition. I-Iere his $ubmission \ryas that inclustry wisc rccognition' wherever possible, is desirable which concept was cvcn acceptecl by the National commission ou Labour. Mr. Sibai also refert'ccl to thc coclc o[ Discipline aclopted at the ,16tr' Session of the Inctiaur La.bour Coulbrcucc helcl in Muy, 1956 ancl fotrnally announcecl on Jurc 01,1958 whjch givcs ' irriority to the inclustry wise recognition ovcr cstabiishrlcnl/pant wisc recog'ition. .Mr. Sibal also sought to clraw sustcnaucc ji-om scction 2(l<) of the Industrial Disputes Act which clefines ihc terur "inclustrierl clispr-rLc" \" ancl section 2 fi) which defines ,.inclustry" ancl thns zuguccr tl,zrt cvcn thc concept of inclustry ancl inclustrial dispute is omiriprescnt in thc Il) Act' ,

¶15Based on the afbfesaicl, his submission was thal collcctivc bargaining being.the right of the wotker, it is their iutct'cst alrd prcfcl'cl'lcc which could get paramount coirsicleration while cletcri'nining cxtcnl of recognition. I-Ie thus, argued that there was no righl to clfcotivc collccl-ivc bargailing, but here c.oncotlitalt right goes to the loot of t|c nterttcr i'c' .,-* riglrt to for-rn associalion which would be meaninglcss if tlic right of tl-re 'associatiotrtocoilectivebar.gainingisrrotacceptecl. a

¶16Mr. Sibal then proceecled to dcvelop the subuission that in [hc present case inclustry-wise collectivc bargaining was lllorc l-casiblc' appr.opriate ancl justified rather than establishmcrrl wisc. In orclcr to LPA zstlzo t I .LPA 303/201 l . wP.(c) 4567/201 o'wP(c) 40 1 8/2008 Page 2O of 37 ru b brilg hone this aspect, his submission was that all thc ornpLoyccs in' I-rve successor companies are approximately 12000 of which rllofc thern ]0000 arc ex-ellployecs of DVB. fhe service conclitions of thosc tratrsferee cmployees, such as prolnotions, transf'els, leave aucl otLtcr allowzrnccs afe ticcl together on account of Section 16 of the Delhi lilcctricity I{cfornrs Act, 2000 and the .fripartite Agreetnent clated January 16,2001' A conjoint reacling of Section 16 of the DIIR Act, 2000 and C]zrusc 3(b) o[ thc Triparlite Agreement makes it clear that thc servicc conclitions of tlre tr-ansfblee ernployees cannot be rnoctiiiecl without "ntlttual ncgotiatious atlcl V 1-,- t---^^t^ti^.^^)) s ettl etnent with re co gnize d uni o n/as s o ci ati o ns "' ' 17 . I-Ie refenecl to the prbvision of Sectio' 16 of thc Dlilt AcL, 2000 ancl submitted'that when the personnel hacl been transfcrrcc{ to ar clillbrcnt coltpany rvhere he enjoyed the same terms ancl conclitions of scrvice, it could oply be the majority union across these cstatrlishrlcnl that zlre 'n inclgstry level which coulcl safeguarcl their iutercst lllorc appropriartcly' l-Ic -- iirguecl that on similal lines Tripartite AgrcetneuL clatccl 16' I '2001 O riglrts provided that:- rccognizecl the rights of the ernployces of DVB guatantecing thcrrr thcsc "3) Now, therefore, in 'consideration of tl'rc proilises and mutuai conditions sct lorth h.crcin, iL is agre"d that in the event of reorganizatiot't of DVll LPA zs:lzo t | .LPA 303/201 I . wP.(c) 4567/201 o-wP(c) 40 | 8/2008 Page 2L ol 37 inlo two or l11ore cotporate entitics ancl 'clisinvestment of any such Lntities of GlrtrCll of Delhi ancl the DVB guarantee as follows:- u;- fft"t" wilt be no retrenchment of prcscnt employees.on account of b.eing decialccl surplus or on account of restructuring of DVI] aruct tlrcir status/service conclitions will not chelugc' b) Thg terms and conclitions of scrvicc Lrporl transfer' to the corllorate entities' stlch as promotions, transfels, leave an'cl other allowauces, etc' r-egulatecl by cxisting regulationsis"r'vice rules i'e' I'-lVSIt rviil bc g.r"*un ""a to conlintte t'he sauuc aud auly moclifications shall bc by mtttuai ncgotiations and settlements rvith l'ecoglltzcct uuion/associations without cletritnctrt to thc existing benefits' c) With regatd to wage negotiations' Lhc prcscnl -)systenrofuipartitenegotiatiorisshallcot.ttinuc. d) to \* (D 0) All the. existing agreemcnts/settlcmcll,t .,lttd i"iabilities shall be honourecl by sllcccssol' cntitics to thc Board ancl the workrnen represetrtccl by thc recoguized union and the associatiotls'

¶18Mr. Sibal laicl emphasis onhis submission thal it is thc erpirellant union which was the signatory to the 'Iripartitc Agfccmcnt on bcherlI of wor.krnen, being the recognized majority union' 'l'hjs starttls o[ tlrc appeila't unio' was accepted by the sr"rbseqr're'tly crcartcd Sllcccssor cornpanies, who have been dealing with the appcllanl' union ovcr Lhc larst several years r-rntil cerlain disputes arose qlla sol'rlc of tlic sLlocessor cornpanies. "fhe above quotecl provision ancl clauscs clearly iclcntify Lhe LPA zs:lzo t , .uoo :orio t I . wP.(c) 4s67l201 o'wP(c) 40 I s/2008 Pa?,e 22 of 37 collective and cornmon interest sharecl by forrncr employccs o'[ Lhc DVI] and the collective interest especially with respect to tcrt.ns zrncl conclitions of service ought to be protectecl and enlorcecl thtough collcclivc bargarining at the industrY level.

¶19It is also submitted that the Govt' of NCI'of Dcllri has createcl a pensiol funcl i1 the form of a trust for the bepcfit of thc trarusferec ctnployees which was colnmon for all the cmployccs across thc firtc Successol: cornpanies. Likewise, the five SLrccessol' cotl]patrics too v constitute a .,collective". The Govt. of NC l' of Dclhi is thc nrost significant link bincliirg all five successol companies. It ow's aud lllzlnagcs two o'[ thc five successor entities ancl has 490/o shareholcling, with ccltral lrratragcnrcnt rights in the rernaining three successor cornpanies' IIc erlso errguecl tlrat in relation to wages, clause 3 (c) of the Triparlilc Agrccrtrcut gt-tzrrzrntccs to the workers that the then prevalent system of negotiations i'c' bct'wccn tlrc Govt. ancl the workers through their recognizecl lJnion, slrzrll continuc' In -. relation to wages, the Wage Revision Committee, wers colrstitr-rtcc{ with participation of all the five successol' compauies. IIc tlrtrs conclLrclccl his argr-rmelts by making a irassionate plea for recognizing thc collcctive bargaining at industry level insofar these five cstablishnrcnts off-slioot of crstwhile DVB is concerned' o I'age 23 of 37 LPA 283/201 I,LPA 303/201 | . wP.(c) 456?/201 o'wP(c) 40 | 8/z008 b{

20.Mr.Nanclrajog,learneclSr'CounselappearingfortlrcNDPI' countered the aforesaid submission of Mr' Sibal' l-lc countercd Ll:c aforesaicl submissions of Mr. sibal by Iaising a prcliminar'y objcction to the maintainability of these proceedings. I'Iis first aud Jbremost submission in this behalf was that there is uo riglrt of fccognition at all of the trade union 'ncler-any statute ancr his arte'ratc sub*rissio' was that even if such a right'could be blaimecl,.thcse were disputccl qucsltons ol facts which requir.ed evidence ancl, therefore, appropriate forttnr was tlrc machinery provicled under the Industrial f)isputes Act b)' rarising inclustrial' disputes. Giving thc scheme of deconstruction of f)vl], lrc pointecl otrl thert it has now been broken ilto various entitics nantcly' gcuerzrtiotr' , i r' , :1---r.:^-^ 'I"l.o.a fi.ra aq1'nlrl tfVOlVCCl transrnrssron ancl ctistribution. These fivc establishmeuts welc I i'to one or the other activity and thcrefore their i'divicrr-raj cha*actcr wcrc totally cliffelent liorn what the DVIS was. Mol'covcr, all llrc lJ:rcc categories i.e. generation, transmission ancl clistributiol wcrc ttncler different regulators. Insofar as disl.ributing cotnl:auies elrc coucerucd by givilg this work to tnore than ope entity, tftc ic{czr wers to encoLll zlgc cornpetition i.c. to break rnonopoly' In such ?r sccllatio' itrgr-rccl Mr' Nandrajog, that the DSEWU may be clominating irl othci csterblishnrcut but hacl no part"nership in this establishrnent ancl givi'g sucS ir tt'ion 'ight LPA 283/20 | I.LPA 303/201 I . wP.(c) 4567/201 o'wP(c) 40 | 82008 Page 24 oI 37 \1 of "oll"ctive bargaining even in respect of the employccs of this r"rnit woulcl not serve any purpose and wor,rlcl rather cleJleat tlrc vcry objecljve' ZI. Mr. Vihay Sabharwal, leatnecl Counsel appca'ing for t6c IPGC1' also ernphasizecl that it was the prerogative of tirc c[rployccs l<r lccognize or uot to recognize a union. Recoglitiol is zrccorclccl to maintain peace ancl harmony in the establishment iu orclcr to sec thzrt thcrc is a. mechanisrn for resolving the dispute acloss thc tablc' I?or thc pLr'lposc' he s'brnittecl thal it was for the employcr to sec as to i,vhich lJ'io. i'its csterblishrlent represents the wolkcr an.cl to cleal wit| suclr aI ttuion' wrrether it should be on industry-wise is the crecisio'whiclr hzrs to lrc lcft to the employer. FIe also subtlittecl that recognition of tttriou rryas thc subject mattel o1linclustrial dispute as providecl in Sl' I3 1 Schcclulc 5 of the Industrial Disputes Act anci writ petition we'e not mairrtzri'zrble-Lcarnccl connscl referred to varioris judgments in support of his subrnission which wouid be referred to at the appropliale stage'

¶22DESIJ Majcioor sangh hacl got impleaclecl itsclf in thcsc procccclings alcl Mr. I(.C. Dubey arguing for this Sangh also sr'rbtlittcd Lhat writ pctitio' of DSEWIJ seeking recognition was not r,ai'Lai'arblc rnorc so rvhen there were so many disrupts within the union. Ilc trighligtrt'ccl thcsc LPA 283/201 I,LPA 303/201 l. wP.(c) 4567/2010-wP(c) 4018/2008 disputes. Thus, thete wgre so nany disputes coulcl be gone into only by the Industrial industrial disPtttc. on qucsliorl o[ lercts which 'I ribr-rnal on rc-lcrcttcc of

¶23We have consiclered the aforesaicl subtnissiotts o[ thc learned counsel for the 1:arties-

¶24Before touching upon the issues involvecl, we woulct likc to collatc some of the facts in ser-iatim which have bearing on lirc c|-icstions rzrisocl' t O, stated above, in the yeat 2000, the Governtlcr"tt o; NC't' ol' I)cthi follrecl a policy to lestructute the DVB' Since the crlployecs of thc DVII were apprehensive about their retrenchtnent ancl their serviccs, er'l'ripartitc Agreement clated 16.1.2001 was dntelecl into' Thc partics into Lhc snicl agl'eement wele Government, DVB and DVII Joint Action Cotrrnritfcc' T.his Tripartite Agreement inter alia proviclecl that:- "All the existing agreelnents/settlcnrclrLs erncl , liabilities shall be hotloured by the sllcccssor .i*errtitiestotheBoardancltlreworktrrenreplcscntccl bytherecogirizeclunionandtlreassociatiotrs.,,

25.In2002,theDVBwasunbunclleclintofivcSLlcceSSoIcolllparnles f o with different business namelY; IPGCL DTL LPA zsrlzo t | .LPA 303/201 l, wP.(c) 4s67l2010,wP(c) 40 | 8/2008 - Geueration bttsincss ''llransmissi on busincss Page 26 ctl37 BYPL, BRPL, NDPI-CTPDDL) Distr ibution br-rsincss.

26.DPCLwassetrrpinteraliatotakeovet.Solllcoftlrcliabiliticsof DVB. 'I'he employees of erstwhile DVB who rryere cerrlier invoh'ccl with the consolidated functioling of the electricily inclustry consisting of erll the activities of generation, transmissiou and clistribution have tlow becn transferrecl to the successol companies arnd they arc cliscbarging'spccific fu'ction either of generation or trausmission or dislritrution. clcpcuding upon the comirany to which their service has been transfcrrcd' lt wor-rlcl tre r. ^-i perlinent to mention here that in the year' 2001 w.P.(c) 363512001 wzrs filed by DvBI(U for determination of rnajority chararctcr' In this urrit petition, following prayers were tnade:- "(a) issue appropriate Writ, Order for I)jrcction in the .atur" oi mandarnus clirecti'g the t'cspondcn.t nos. I 8L 2 (DVB aucl Labour Comnrissioncr' Governtneut of NCT of Delhi) to determincd thc rnajority character of the trade unions rc1:rcscnting the worlcmen/employees in responclbnt No' 1(DVI ) for the purpose tf t""ogttition as rnajolity union' through secr:et ballot, as per the 1:t"occclurc rrr"r"iib"d in CLC instruction No' 25180, datecl

18.r2.1980.'

(b) issue appropr-iate Writ, Order of I)ircction cliiecting ,"rppni"nt no.1 (DVII) to lccogni.zc Lltc union io,rn.l itt rnajority afler dctc:t'inartio' of rnajority character through secret ballot systcur for a p*tioa of two years fiotrr thc datc of tlrc cotnmunication to the said effect' Page27 of37 LPA zsrpo t I .LPA 303/20 | I . wP'(c) 4567/201o.wP(c) 4018/2008 , petition was lilecl by M)PL Staff Association seeking clileotion for bolding elcction in TPDDI, and fot cletermination of the rnajority chararctcr of [[rc Association. Since TPDDL consentecl for holcling clection, thc irrpugucd orclers were passed on the basis of saicl cous'enL' As far as othcr two writ petitions were concerned, they were a.djoumed to 17.3-201I'

¶28Be as it may, when the LPAs wcle filecl challcnging thc orcler clatccl 2I.2.201I, the other two writ petitions wel:e also listocl alongwjththcsc LpAs u'cier thc circnmstances alreacly noted abovc. In thcsc procccc{ings v conscnt orclers dated 27.5.2011 werc passed whcrctry Divisjon llcrlch allowing for separate elections to be helcl in five sllccciisor companies lor the li'rited p'rpose of finding out rvrrich tracle rurio's cnjoys the 'rajoril-y of the cinployces. The consent to hold such sclcctions lizls rryithor-rt prejudice to tjre rights ancl contentions of thc parLics to 'thc arppcal' Elections wefe helct in each of the five cotnpauics through sccLcl barllol on ctiffer.e't clzites. DSEWU has wo'thc electio's in thc thrce clistribr-rtion \*- cornpanles ancl IPGCL. DVBKU won the election jn D'l'I'' 11/

¶29Iirom the aforesaid conccrncd, it alreadY holds it becomes cleal that insoim as DSIJ twtl is majority in thc three clistr'ibr"rtiou corll.purnies as LP A zst tzo tl,LPA 3 03/20 | I' wP.(c) 4s67l20 I o'wP(c) 40 | 82008 Page 29 o{ 37 fhis wr:it petition was clisnissecl by the leatnccl s.linglc 'lr-rclgc viclc orclet clatecl 6.2.2002 observing as under:- ..ResponclentNo.lnowstatrdsbifurcatec|iuto clifferent entities Jepending on the areas and naturc of wor.k being peiformed. In vicw tlrcrcof thc *xt"l#lx l: H :iHl, J'tr::##ii'11'?: i; n.otyeti<rrownwhdtwotrldbenatureoftlrcturionof each of these entities." 2T . In the year 2006, NDPL Electrical staff Associalion was fornrecl as an establishnrent specific union of TPDDL, iryhiclr wurs strbscc|-rcntly \.,, anrencled as NDPL Staff Association on' 22.12'2009' In thc year 2007' DTL and IPGCL refused to deal withDSIIWU as thc majority uniou', since they wer.e outsiders and not their ernployees. It wotrlcl bc intcrcsting to note that \I/.P(C) 456712010 was filed by DVIII(IJ lor the conch-rot of cornbi*ecr eleclions to be held in alr trre bilurcatccl conrpa'ies anc{ the w.P.(c) 401812008 of DsEWtJ seeking fecognition as rlajority r'il"rion hacl coIIIe up for hearing alongwith wP(c)47 6312010 (out of wliich LPA 28312011 arises). They wele listecl together on the 1:tctnisc tharl issr-res iu 'r-\ \ all the writ petitions were similar'in nature. Accordingly, on [J'2'201 [' , 9.2.2OII ancl 2I.2.20I1 these writ petitions werc terkcn Lrp together' I-Iowever, on21.2.2011, the counsel for DSEWIJ and DvllK{J submil'tccl tlrar tlrey were not concerned with the WP(C) 476312010' 'fhis writ 1t ,o Page 2a of 37 LPA283/20ll,LPA303/2011'wP'(c)4567/201o,wP(c)4018/2008 u,ell as IPGCL ancl, thelefore, on the"basis of that clccLion, i1' can erlrverys seek recognition. So is the positiol of I)VBKU i1D'I'I,.

¶30In this backclrop, we have to clecide tire issue raisecl by the appellants DVBKU. 'fhcy claim rigtrt of "collectivc representative union and this ligtrt of "collective namely DSEWU and bargaining" tht ough their bargaining,' and. it is sr-rbmitted that this right of "coj.lcctivc lrzrrgarintug should be ,industry' based. No cloubt, collectivc bargaiqirrg has been consiclerecl by the Apex Court as a raison. del:er clf thc tracle uuions in Food Corpordtion of Xnclia (supra). fhe moot issuc is zrs to whcthcr this ,,collective bargaining" should be establishmenL wise or iuclustry bzrsccl' .fhere may be circumstances which may define ind.usl-ry-wi.sc rccogniliot't' The National commission of Labour, rg6l uracle ccrtain rccolnrrrcnclarlions which would have bearing on this aspect ancl thcrcforc tbe szul]c arc reproduced:- ective ?\ recognition may give lise to certaiu problctrs .in ,"guiO to the circutnstance iu which jt slroulcl bc gr;rrt"a and in regard to t|e rights arncl f1lcti9ps o.[ ilurrt-*ir" unions vis-a-vis thc iuclustry/areer r.rr',.ior',.r, parlicularly whcn the majority uniorr at the plant ievel has no affiliation with thc rccognizccl LPA z.qrpo t | .LPA 303/201 l. wP.(c) 4-s67l20 | o.wP(c) '10 | 8/2008 ions at suPPlicd)' Suclr inclustry/area union' Ir has been-btought t! o'ttt-notice that' "*fioy"ts of units in which the irJ"ttw-level ,"liogi""cl 1nio3 has no following' find themseives i " clifficuli situation wheu confionted by the detnands of the plant union' which they cannoi ig"ot"' This situation can ouly be set right frv u p'6p"' clenrarcation o[ tlt: -1]9Tt anql functioiis "i tit" industly/alea. Ieco er;:11d ..-rniont and plant-wise unions' a'd by cnsurlllg that recognitio; ; the inclustry/alea t:l^?,"i: 7t LrraL rfivvb*^Lrv^i well clcfinecl conferred' subject to cel-taln 1--.-t--..,.,i-n

¶31I.ikewise, Cod'e of Disciirline provides as tittclet:- '"A tepresentative rinion for an induStry in 'an area ,h"J{;;;; the light to represelt lL'" workcrs rn all.theestablislrmentsin^theirrclustry,br-rtirar unionofworlrer,i,'uparlicular.e^stablishmcntlrers a membership of 50%i' too'" of the worlccrs of tlratestablishmentit,strouahavetlrerighttoclcal with matters of p.rr"iy local inlercst, surch ls, for i"';;;;lrt"rto"aliniofgrievanccspcrtainingtl it' o*" mernber' .Ail ottt"t workcrs whr:l auc not member of that tt"'* *ight either opctatr: througl'r therepresentative""i"""ro'theitrclrrstryorscck . redress dilectlY'"

32.Sofarsogood.Whatistobenoteclftomtlrcabclvcistlratevcnels per tire aforesaid, industrywise recognition is desirablc' whcrovcr possible' In the p1-esenl case, whereas the petitioner DsIiwtJ argtlcs that herving I Page 31-of 37 LP A zsl tzo tl .LPA 3 03/20 | I I wP'(c) 4567120 I O'wP(c) 40 I 8/2008 rcgarci to the fact that it is erstwhile DVB whiclr was on'c cntity eurcl rtow r-rnbundlecl,in these cliffelent union ancl purpose retnarius tlrc salllc lrzrttrcly' generation, transmission ancl clistribution of the elcctricity arnd that too' for the resiclents of Delhi as well as the fact that the l"ripartite Agreentettt ellsures the existing work nor-nls prevailing i'DVII to contir-ruc incltrdi'g service conclitious of the employees would continue, thc rcsl:cludcrlts arguecl otherwise. 'lheir case is that on the formation oI. these fivc cntitics with specific job activity/plofile, the position has uucletgotLc sca clraurgc' ,\L There is 'o si'rilarity in ter-ms of ernirloyi'ent ancl inl.ercst of worknren. Mr.. Nandrajog hacl highlighted that now thc setvicc concutions ol' cx-DVB emplol,ees ancl employees hired by'fPDDI, atc cotlplctcly cliffcrcll Folloling tabulat comparison was given by him:- '[PDDtr,-IlnnPloYces 'fhcy arre Paiicl walgcs in accorclatlcc with I f;;*t-- -- -f n*nVu frrnPloY"us llL-_-- l-=-" [W-^e"t I rn"Y are Paid wages I - | itt line with thc | | tecommendation o[ I I Wage Revision ' I I Committce headed bY I I Justice Lokeshwar I I Prasad' DA is tevisccl | | twice in a-191 r------- r-a---- F I utisibiiitv fol I fhey ale llletllDcr or | " I cPF' TheY arc | "o,r"run" uncler a I membcr of pcusiou | " I fu"a aucl Pension is I scheme for I Paid to ! DVII | | emPlol'es bY Peusion | | trr-rst- '&gY--99-PeiS!, L-- thc contrarct betwcct-t indivicluzrl cnterecl thc LPA 283/20 | I ,LPA 303/20 | | . wP.(o 4567/20 | o.wP(c) 401 8/2008 crnployee atlcl tlrc cnrploycr. No DA is Peill l'.iber: 1'licy bccotrre mctlbcr of ljI'}FO-No pcnsion rclalcd trcncfit is averilerble Lo thcm cxccPt tunclcr IIPS. 'fhcY euc pe]!!l gratr"rilY. Page 32 ol 37 retirement benefits glatuity as per thc rurlc prescribed uncler ension)Rules. Maternity Leave 135 days Pater-nity Leave Child Care Leave (fol Feinale ISrnployces) Medical benefits 15 days 730 days upto 2 children till attaintncnt of 1B years ofage They are provided fiee rnedicine at the cotrrpatty's dispensaries and hee rnedical treattnent at the hospital in case oI achnission zrt CGI-IS .fhere is unclcr PaLyttcu[ of Gt'atuity Act. [34 clztys 6 clays No such provision No to"ail;ii" is proviclcd fi"cc of cost zrt contpany's clispcnsarics.'I'hcsc ctnployccs covcrcd A ! runcler tate. provision assistauce fol medical relief mccliclaiitrr PolicY tzrken bY Lhc ccln')pany. No such mccl.ical rcJicf arller rctit'ctnent. No suclr provision 'l'lroy .otll') rcLrcnchccl. lecognizing a single Lo espousc tlrc clzrittrs Page 33 ol'37 for fi'ce arfler "!- retiretnent v"ii-t"ty i=Tir"m"nt They are guidecl bY the plovision of Itule 56 (I() of FRs which regulale retiretlent voluntaty Retrenchtnent 'Itipartite Agreetncnl" imposes r estrictions with t'egarcl to retreucltment of thesc employees

¶33It was also argued that the concept of replesentativi: union that is exclusirrely etupowerccl LPA zs:20 t I.LPA 303/201 I . wP'(c) 4s67l20t0,wP(c) 'l0l B/2008 of all the ernployees of TPDDL, clisregarcls the position lhat 'l]?D[)l' lras clifferc't classes of employees, which may not irave crc.raurcrs or erspiratio's that are comtnon to one another" Recognizilg thzrt a parti'cular r-rtrion wourld have the power to bargain collectively oll bchalf o[ a][ sr-ich cruployees and to enter: into settlerneuts that would bc bincling otl all strch employees tnpy thercfore work contraly to the iuterests of all the worlters' 34,. W.hcn --Yr", look the aforesaicl contrasting stzrucls tzrltcn by thc restrective parties, we i'tend to agree with thc sr'rtrtlissiops o[ tbc ! resirondents i.c. to find out as to whether inclustt'y-wisc recogtlition is feasible o, ,, has to be establishment wise, can bc gol'lc into by tl"re Incl'strial hibr-rnal by means of adjr-rciication. 'I'he I'c{r-rstrizrl Dispr-rtcs Ac{" contemplates such tnechanism to soft out such issucs' Mi' Nanclra'iog' . lcarned sr. counser has drawn oul' atte'tion to sccti'' i0 o1-Lhc Il) Act which provide that in respect of each indr-rstrial clisputc rvhctc tlrc parLies applyf3rarefclencetoanyoftheforumsprcscribec|r'rtlclcrtlrc.IDAct, t thiit the approl:riate governn'tent shall, if satisfiecl that tlL@ lepresenf the maiority of each palty. makc a rclbrcucc zrcco'rclingly' O l,ikewise, Section 10A(3A) of the ID Act proviclcs for rolcrctrcc to arbiiration. Therefore, with respect to each rc-[ercltcc, (i) thc zip't'o;r'izitc govclxlnent is recluired to be satisfiecl as to whothcr thc nrajolify lras bcetr LPAzs:lzotl,LPA303/20ll.wP.(c)4s67120t0,wP(c)4018/2008 Page34 of 37 represcnted; ancr (ii) in case of arbitialion, the conccrnccl pa'ties rrarvc to be ' allowed trre opportunity of presenting their case. S'ch provisio.s niiliLartc against the proposition put forth by DSEWTJ that er pzuticurlar uuion czui clainageneralr.iglrttoberecognizcclasthcyrei:resctrttrtivcuniotrcntiLlcc| to represent the worlcmen of an estabrishment on ail iss'cs. 'ftrc zrb'ity a'cl iceenness of a*y union to effectively represe't thc ernployces ot1 a particular issue has to be seen in rigrrt of trre particr-rrar lacts.of zr carsc ancl theciassofq'nployeeswhowouldbealfccteclbysuclrncgotiaLion' 1 1:-1---^'-{'rr' 's to be givcn ITherefor.e,tlreissuewh.etlrerestablislrment_wiselccogtttttont to the unions or. it should be industr-ywise, neecls acrjr-rcliozrtio' for which the appropriate forum would the Industriai Tribunal' I I

35.Wehavealsotobearinminclthataso.[now,tlrercisnostattttoty provision,rvlriclrgivesriglrttoauniontoseekrecogniLionanclsucharriglrt can be clairnecl only by iaising inclustrial dispute' wc woul<l lil<c to lrigh light.tornentiontheinternaldisputesashighlightcclbyt|rclezrrrrccl counser for trre DEsu Mazdoor sangh. I{e hacl sr-rbmittcd that altcr this courl directerl elections vide o'der clatecl 27'5'2ol'f i'cornpliance wilh trre said order, the Deputy Labour commissio'r:r viclc or clcr cltrlccr r2.8.2011, specificalry wrote ..unions registerecr unclcr 'r'rarcle l,'ion Aot' rg26only can file their nomination pai)ers belore tirc rcspcctivc prcsiclirig LPAzsrlzot|.LPA303/20ll.wP.(c)45672010.wP(c)4018/2008 "4',q ' officers,,. The petitioner submitted its nominalion ptu)cr' It nrcnLioncd thc clate of registration as 06.0,+-tglO-It wrote its Regn' No'36' It sLrbmittecl a Registration certificate whichis in the narnc of "I)cltri lilcctric sr"4:ply Undeftaking wolkers IJuion" which beals Regn' No' 1456 ctatecl 06104/19T0.Itissouglrttopointoutthattlrer.egistratiotrNo.36isagarirrst tlrenaneofatrUnionnarnely...I.heDelliistateElcctricityWorkers lJnion,,. There was, another rurion namely "I)ellri lilectricity supply u'clertaking workers union,, bearing registrzrtio' No-t456 clzrtecl ,l'' 0610411970. A letter datecr 3rr3rrg73 issr.re<l by rhc ofrrcc of ltcgistra* \' ar*oe union shows that the saicl seconcl U'ion bcari'g *cg'- No-1456 mergecl into the union bearing l{egn. No' 36' 'flrtts' on 2811211972 Lhc , u'ion narnely .,neilri Electricity sr-rppry U'.crcrtaking workcrs LJ'i.'" bearring Regn. No. 1456 was mergcd into "the Dcllri statc lilcctricity Workers l]nion" bearing Regn. No' 36"I'here[orc' thc l{cgn' No' 1456 is non,]'oleine2<'istenceandtlreRegn.No.36isoftJ.rct.Irliorrtr.zrnrcly..'J.lre Delhi State Electricity Workers lJnion." Mr. Dr-rbey, lulthcl subtliLtccl tltat \he ,"pry' fi-o'r .the Depr.rty Labour cornnissioner . clocs show tSzrl he pctitioner is not a registetecl'fiade lJnion' ,a LPA 283/201 l .LPA 303/20 | | ' wP.(c) 456720 | o,wP(c) 40 | 8/2008 l']age 36 of 37 p

¶36Iior this reason, rve clismiss these LPAs giving liberty to the petitioners in these writ clispute, if they so desire. zrs u,clJ a.s thc Wlit Pe[ilions 1:ctitions to raisc inclust'ria.l

¶37No order as to costs. W)rY6 t^-' 1ll1\ ncqffi-eTiffisusrrcn , JIILY T3,2OT2 sl<b 1-', - LPA zalzo t I .LPA 303/201 I . wP.(c) 4567/20 | o,wP(c) 40 I 8/2008 (I{AJIV SABn,Ax Xti\ DI,AW) .]UDGE Page37 ol37 9\