Delhi High Court
Air Traffic Safety Electronics ... vs Airports Authority Of India on 25 August, 2020
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision : 25.08.2020
+ W.P.(C) 2011/2020
AIR TRAFFIC SAFETY ELECTRONICS PERSONNEL
ASSOCIATION (INDIA) ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.K.V.Balakrishnan,
Mr.S.M.Sundaram, Advs.
versus
AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Digvijay Rai, Mr.Aman
Yadav, Advs. for AAI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
This hearing has been held through video conferencing.
CM 20251/2020 (Exemption from filing notarized affidavit and
affixing of court fees)
1. This application has been filed seeking exemption from filing
duly notarized affidavit and affixing requisite court fee. Binding the
deponent of the affidavit to the contents of the application, the
exemption is granted.
2. Court fee shall be deposited online with the concerned authority
within one week and physical stamp be filed within 72 hours from the
date of resumption of regular functioning of the Court, as mandated in
terms of Office Order dated April 04, 2020 issued by this Court.
WP(C) No.2011/2020 Page 1
3. Application is disposed of.
CM 20252/2020 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CM 20250/2020 (Stay)
1. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Mr.Digvijay Rai, Advocate
on behalf of the respondent. He prays for and is granted two weeks'
time to file the response to the application. Rejoinder, if any, be filed
within two weeks thereafter.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the affidavit
filed by the respondent pursuant to the directions of this Court on
06.03.2020, clearly reflects that 34 persons belonging to the Airport
Systems had cast their votes in the election process.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that apart
from these 34 persons, there were many who belonged to the category
of Management and were not members of the Association(s) who were
competing for recognition from the respondent and inspite of the
same, the respondent has merely excluded 34 persons and not others
from election process.
4. Further, placing reliance on Clause 6 of the 'Policy on
Recognition of Officers' Association operating in AAI' (hereinafter
referred to as 'Policy') and specifically Clauses 6(a), (b) and (c)
thereof, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
respondent has also not carried out the exercise to find out the
members of the Associations in fray for recognition nor sought the
WP(C) No.2011/2020 Page 2
undertaking/declaration from such members stating that he/she is a
member of such Association, before allowing such persons to vote in
the process.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent has
submitted that 34 persons belonging to the Airport Systems had
inadvertently been allowed to vote and once this was found out, their
votes were excluded from consideration. He submits that even with
the exclusion of these votes, the difference between the respondent
and the CNS Officers' Guild, the Association which succeeded in the
elections, in the number of votes polled by them was more and would
not have any effect on the ultimate result of the election.
6. As far as the Management votes are concerned, he submits that
there is no exclusion for such officers taking part in the election
process.
7. He further submits, that the Policy was amended by the
Impugned Circular to bring about transparency in the system and
therefore, cannot be faulted. He submits that the process of taking the
undertakings/declarations as provided in Clause 6(a) of the Policy,
was not done by the respondent as there were more than one
Associations in fray for recognition; for the cadres for which there was
only one Association in the fray, such undertakings were taken.
WP(C) No.2011/2020 Page 3
8. The learned counsel for the respondent further submits that as
the petitioner has participated in the election process, it cannot now
challenge the same.
9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels
for the parties. The Impugned Circular dated 14.01.2020, merely adds
Clause (h) to Chapter 6 of the Policy and reads as under:
"h) In case where more than one Officers' Association
contests for recognition in the same cadre, the membership
count shall be decided on the basis of exercise of option
through ERP-SAP module. Accordingly, the Officers'
Association obtaining maximum number of undisputed votes in
the said cadre shall be considered for grant of recognition.
In case of any discrepancy, the decision of the AAI Management
shall be final and binding."
10. The said Clause, does not have the effect of nullifying the effect
of Clauses 6(a) to (c) of the Policy but is to be read in conjunction
thereto. Clause 6 (a) to (c) of the Policy are reproduced hereinbelow:
"a) The application shall be accompanied with copy of valid
Registration Certificate of the said Association; its
Memorandum of Association; its Constitution/By-Laws along
with a certified Copy of the last Returns submitted to the
Registrar of Societies and the names of its Members (as on 01st
January) alongwith a duly signed and dated
undertaking/declaration from each member stating that he/she
is a member of such Association, including any other
information as may be required from the Association by the
management, for the purpose. The Association shall submit its
list of members, alongwith a duly signed and dated
undertaking/declaration from each member stating that he/she
is a member of such Association, in the following proforma,
WP(C) No.2011/2020 Page 4
duly attested by President/Secretary of said Association, on
each page:-
Sl.No. Employee Name Designation Grade of Present
Number of of Officer Officer place of
Officer (indicate posting
E1 to
E9)
A B C D E F
b) On the basis of list of Members as on 01st January, as be
submitted by each eligible Association, the total Four
Associations (three cadre based and one for common cadre),
having maximum number of undisputed members (who are on
the rolls of AAI), on all India basis, shall primarily be
considered for grant of Recognition for a period of two years.
c) In case, the name of an officer is found in the list of more
than one Association, as its Member(s), the said
name/membership shall not be treated as valid, meaning
thereby, said name shall be read as deleted from all those lists."
(Emphasis supplied)
11. A reading of Clause 6(a) to (c) shows that for applying for
recognition, the Association has to inter alia give the names of its
members alongwith duly signed and dated undertaking/declaration
from each Member stating that he/she is a Member of such
Association. Further, if the name of an officer is found to be on the
list of more than one Association, as its member, the said
name/membership is not to be treated as right, meaning thereby, the
said name has to be treated as deleted from these lists.
WP(C) No.2011/2020 Page 5
12. Clearly therefore, before allowing an officer to vote in the
election process, the respondent has to carry out such an exercise to
find out the members who can participate in the election process. As
presently submitted, such process does not seem to have been
followed by the respondent. It is not denied by the respondent that
officers who were not members of any of the Associations have also
been allowed to vote in the election process. Prima facie, this would
be contrary to the procedure prescribed in Condition 6 of the Policy.
13. As far as the submission of the learned counsel for the
respondent that the process of Clause 6(a) to (c) has to be followed
only in cases where there is only one Association in fray for
recognition, cannot be accepted. In fact, Clause 6(c) of the Policy
comes into operation and makes the purpose of taking the
undertakings/declarations relevant only in cases where there are more
than one Associations in the fray for the elections.
14. In view of the above, the respondent is restrained from giving
effect to the provisional recognition granted by it in favour of the
C.N.S. Officers' Guild pursuant to the election process undertaken by
it, till the next date of hearing.
WP(C) 2011/2020
List this petition and the application as per the general
directions issued by the Delhi High Court.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
AUGUST 25, 2020/RN
WP(C) No.2011/2020 Page 6
