The industrial court can cancel one’s recognition at any time under such circumstances.

• If by any means the Industrial court has recognised any union out of mistake or accidently or have misrepresented or that union has committed any fraud. Even if any previous union in that industry is already recognised then under all these circumstances the recognition of trade union can be cancelled.

Any trade union within the time of six months have helped, participated, originated, or supported the commencement or continuation of any illegal strike, will not recognise any such trade union.

Trade union works under the beneficiary of the employer instead of employee and works under the interest of the employer than such union will not be recognised by the industrial court.

If any trade union is not following any condition or rules that is mentioned under S.19 of MRTU and PULP Act.

The registration of the recognised union has come to an end or has already ended or have finished their tenure they will have to reapply for the recognition of the same.

Any movement of time if any other trade union claims to have a greater number of people than the applicant trade union or recognised trade union or has the largest membership than any other trade union and satisfies the condition for recognition under S.11 and S.19 of the MRTU and PULP Act, and application by the other union are verified then the industrial court grant such recognition to the other union and also will issue the certificate of its recognition. The previous trade union’s recognition would be cancelled.

In the recognised trade union, the criteria of minimum thirty percent of members have been decreased and has remained the less than thirty percentage for six calendar months then the trade unions recognition and certificate would be cancelled.[1]

• If any trade union has committed any unfair trade practices and is a recognised trade union or has done anything like unfair trade practices, then the industrial court will give the notice for the same and an inquiring office will be sent to inquire. If proven guilty for practising unfair labour practices or anything like it then their recognition would be cancelled.[2]

Association of Engineering Workers v. Dockyard Labour Union[3]

Association of Engineering Workers is a Trade Union registered and represents the employees in the undertaking of Mazgaon Docks Limited, Bombay. The Association of Engineering Workers is also registered as recognised union in respect of the undertaking of respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 1-Dockyard Labour Union is also a Trade Union registered and filed Application on October 19, 1987 for registration as a recognised union under the MRTU & PULP Act. The application filed under S.14 of that Act was resisted by the petitioner union by filing written objections in November 1987. The petitioner union raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the application on the ground that the registration of Dockyard Labour Union was cancelled by the Additional Registrar of Trade Unions, Bombay on January 30, 1981 and consequently the application for registration under the MRTU & PULP Act was not maintainable.  The Dockyard Labour Union answered the preliminary objection by pointing out that the order of cancellation of the registration passed on January 30, 1981 was withdrawn by the Additional Registrar of Trade Unions, Bombay on March 12, 1981 and consequently the registration of Dockyard Labour Union was in operation and the Union can seek registration under the MRTU & PULP Act.  Preliminary objection raised by the petitioner was overruled. The word “mistake” used in clause (a) above covers a mistake of fact as well as a mistake of law.[4]

Mazdoor Congress v. S. Samant[5]

The Bombay High Court has held, in one case, that the Industrial Court was justified in cancelling the recognition of a union on the ground that its membership had, for a continuous period of six months, fallen below the minimum stipulated in S. 11 of the Act.

Nagrik Sahakari Runalaya Karmachari Union v. Nagrik Sahakari Runalaya Maryadid Ltd[6] According to the Bombay High Court, the nature of the industry in which a strike was instigated (a hospital, in the present case), is to be given due weight when considering the question of cancellation of recognition of a union.

[1] Section 13(1) of MRTU & PULP Act

[2] Section 13(2) of MRTU & PULP Act

[3] 1992 II CLR 382

[4] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/916325/

[5] 1984 II LLN 706

[6] 1983 LIE 1645.

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com

We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.

We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge