Delhi High Court
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation ... vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. ... on 23 September, 2016
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ WP(C) 8560/2016
DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION EMPLOYEES UNION
..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate
versus
DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through : None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
ORDER
% 23.09.2016
CM APPL. 35259/2016 (exemption)
Subject to the appellant filing the certified/typed/legible copies of the
documents annexed with the appeal within four weeks, the application is
allowed and disposed of.
CM No.35258/2016 (u/Sec.151 CPC for stay of the DMRC Staff Council
election scheduled to be held on 24.9.2016)
1. The writ petition has been placed before the Court on urgent
mentioning being allowed.
2. The accompanying petition has been filed by the petitioner/Union
praying inter alia for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents
calling for conducting a free and fair election of the respondent
No.2/DMRC Staff Council.
3. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner/Union that though
the petitioner/Union is a registered Body, it has not been granted recognition
by the respondent No.1 and repeated communications addressed by the
petitioner/Union to the respondent No.1 demanding recognition, have not
borne any result. Instead, the respondent No.1 has proceeded to issue a
schedule for conducting the election of the respondent No.2/Council. He
therefore submits that the respondents be restrained from conducting the
elections for reconstituting the respondent No.2/DMRC Staff Council.
4. Records reveal that a Notice was issued by the Management of the
respondent No.1 as long back as on 18.8.2016, proposing to reconstitute the
respondent No.2/DMRC Staff Council (Annexure-P-10). Subsequently, a
Notice dated 7.9.2016, was issued by the respondent No.1 enlisting the
names of such of the employees whose nominations were found valid to
contest the election of the Staff Council representatives (Annexure P-11).
The said Notice had clarified that a candidate may withdraw his nomination
by giving a notice in writing to the Electoral Officer by 9.9.2016. This was
followed by issuance of a Circular dated 9.9.2016 (Annexure-P-12),
whereunder the Electoral Officer had informed all the employees of
respondent No.1 that the voting for the Staff Council elections will be held
on 24.9.2016 from 9.00 AM to 5.30 PM and counting of the votes will take
place on 26.9.2016 (Monday).
5. The petitioner/Union has elected to approach the Court at the eleventh
hour, as the present petition was initially filed on 20.9.2016 and was
returned by the Registry under objections that were removed and it was
re-filed on 22.9.2016. It is not as if the petitioner/Union was unaware of the
Notice dated 18.8.2016 issued by the respondents for reconstitution of the
respondent No.2/Council or the Notice dated 7.9.2016, identifying the
employees whose nomination was found to be valid to contest in the election
for Staff Council representatives or for that matter, the Circular dated
9.9.2016, issued by the Electoral Officer intimating all the concerned
employees that the Staff Council election shall be held on 24.9.2016. All
the said Notices/Circulars are a part of the paper book. However, the
petitioner/Union has waited till the very last minute to approach the court,
knowing very well that the voting shall take place tomorrow.
6. There is no justification for the petitioner to have approached the
Court so belatedly and that too for seeking a stay of the elections. Once the
election process has commenced, it ought to be taken to its logical
conclusion. Accordingly, the prayer made in the present application is
declined.
7. The application is dismissed.
WP(C) 8560/2016
1. Counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the fact that no interim
order has been granted in favour of the petitioner on the interim application
for stay of the DMRC Staff Council election, nothing further would survive
for adjudication in the writ petition.
2. In view the aforesaid submission, the writ petition is disposed of.
HIMA KOHLI, J
SEPTEMBER 23, 2016
sk/mk/ap
