JUDGMENT A. S. NAIDU, J. : M/s. Birla Tyres Employee’s Union seeks to assail modality adopted for recognition of the union by the Labour Commissioner-cum-Registrar of Trade Unions-cum-State Implementation and Evaluation Officer. 2. In consonance with an application filed by the peti¬tioner Union steps were taken by the Labour Commissioner, Orissa, opposite party No.1, for verification of membership of the trade unions functioning in M/s. Birla Tyres through secret ballots and notice was issued to the Vice-President of M/s. Birla Tyres to submit the entire list of workmen borne in the register of the establishment to the returning officer for their participation as voters in the secret ballot. The letter dated 13.9.2001, Annex¬ure-1, stipulated that it did not matter “whether any workman is a member of a particular union or not, or whether any workman had given anything in writing to the management to abstain form the voting, etc.” The petitioner-union assailed the said letter before this Court in OJC No.12827 of 2001 on the ground that the same was not in consonance with Clause (b) of Rule 11(3) of the Verifica¬tion of Membership and Recognition of Trade Union Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’). According to the peti¬tioner-union it was incumbent upon the returning officer to screen out and publish the final list of workmen who are eligible to participate in secret ballot in the Notice Board with copies thereof to the employer and union at least fifteen days before the date of ballot. This Court disposed of the said Writ applica¬tion by order dated 22.3.2005 observing as follows :- “In such view of the matter, no exception can be taken to Annexure-1 as it is unless the same is read to be one that has intended to publish the list submitted by the employer as it is. In view of Clause (b) of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 11, the final list of eligible workmen to participate in secret ballot is to be scrutinized and placed in the notice board and, as such, the Returning Officer has to scrutinize before the list of eligible voters are published in terms of Clause (b) of Sub-rule (3). It is agreed by the learned counsel for opposite party No.10, the employer, that they will be furnishing the list of all workmen working in the establishment to the Returning Officer within a fortnight hence. It is agreed by the learned counsel for opposite party No.10, the employer, that they will be furnishing the list of all workmen working in the establishment to the Returning Officer within a fortnight hence. On receipt of the same, the Returning Officer shall consider and take appropriate steps in accordance with rules within the time stipulated therein where-after the verifi¬cation has to be done at an early date. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.” After receipt of the order of this Court, the authorities initiated the process for due compliance with the requirement of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 11. A notice was issued on 29th March, 2005, vide Annexure-6, to all the unions enclosing lists of names and particulars of employees working in M/s. Birla Tyres (which were furnished by the employer) and called upon the unions to communi¬cate their objections/suggestions, if any, to the said lists on or before 12th April, 2005. The letter further indicated that if no objections were received within the stipulated time, it would be construed that there was nothing to say in the matter and the lists of employees would be treated as final and valid. The petitioner-union submitted its objections, vide Annexures-7 and 8. After considering the objections, the District Labour Officer-cum-Returning Officer, Balasore opposite party No.2, by order dated 15th April, 2005, Annexure-11, disposed of the objections/suggestions and convened a meeting for finalisation of the code of conduct with regard to secret ballot. The representa¬tives of most of the unions signed the minutes drawn on 20th April, 2005. On 21st April, 2005, vide letter Annexure-12, the Returning Officer, opposite party No.2, in consonance with the order dated 24th April, 2005 of opposite party No.1 passed in exercise of power conferred under Rule 11(2) of the Rules notified that the voting by secret ballot for verification of membership of the unions functioning in M/s. Birla Tyres would be held on 18.5.2005. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has once again ap¬proached this Court alleging that the list of eligible voters has not been prepared or published in consonance with law and, as such, the election cannot be held. 3. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has once again ap¬proached this Court alleging that the list of eligible voters has not been prepared or published in consonance with law and, as such, the election cannot be held. 3. The opposite parties on receiving the Rule have filed their counter affidavits, inter alia taking the stand that the Labour authorities have acted strictly in consonance with law and the directions issued by this Court in OJC No.12827 of 2001 and the allegations levelled in the Writ Petition are unfounded. 4. Mr. Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, forcefully submitted that the modalities adopted for conducting secret ballot for the purpose of recognition of unions without determining as to who among the employees are valid mem¬bers and are eligible to vote, as contained in the order Annex¬ure-12 for conducting secret ballot are contrary to the provi¬sions of the Rules. According to him, till date no valid voter- list has been prepared and an election, under no stretch of imagination, can be conducted without a valid voter-list. In short, Mr. Mohanty submits that the authorities should be first directed to prepare the voter-list and then to start the election process. 5. To countenance such submission, Mr. B. R. Routray and other learned counsel appearing for different opposite parties, forcefully submitted that in the earlier Writ application (supra) this Court had clearly directed the authorities to conduct secret ballot following the provisions of Clause (b) of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Rules. In consonance with the said direction, the authorities called for objections/suggestions, convened a meeting to chalk out the code of conduct and then issued the notice for conducting election. Thus they did not commit any irregularity or illegality and it is a fit case where the Writ Petition should be dismissed in limine. 6. We have patiently heard learned counsel for the par¬ties, meticulously perused the pleadings of the parties and the relevant rules and diligently considered the submissions made. The moot question that arises to be decided in this Writ Petition is as to whether a valid voter-list consisting of eligible mem¬bers is necessary for conducting secret ballot for the purpose of recognition of trade unions and as to who are eligible to vote. 7. For the purpose of verification of membership and recognition of trade unions, a set of Rules as aforesaid have been framed. 7. For the purpose of verification of membership and recognition of trade unions, a set of Rules as aforesaid have been framed. Chapter II of the said Rules contemplates the constitution of a State Implementation and Evaluation Committee. The duty of the Evaluation Officer is to receive applications of the unions, examine the same and recommend for grant of recognition by the employer. Different modalities for grant of recognition are stipulated in Rule 5. Rule 5(iv) authorizes the Evaluation Offi¬cer to conduct verification of the union membership by secret ballot for the purpose of recognition of the unions by the em¬ployer. Rule 9 stipulates that the voting shall be held by secret ballot under the supervision of the Returning Officer. Chapter III deals with the method of conducting secret bal¬lot. Rule 11 is relevant for adjudication of the present dispute and it will be prudent to quote the same :- “11. In case of Multiple Unions-(1) In case of multiplicity of unions in an industry, where applications in Form ‘A’ in case of unions and Form ‘B’ in case of employers prescribed under these rules in triplicate along with prescribed fees have been received by the State Implementation and Evaluation Officer form any of the unions or the employer and after preliminary enquiry if the union is found to be fulfilling the criteria for recogni¬tion, he shall- (a) order for verification of union membership through secret ballot; (b) appoint the Returning Officer; and (c) forward a copy of the orders to the employer, the union(s) concerned and the Returning Officer. (2) The Returning Officer on receipt of the order and within period of 30 days shall notify the date, place and time of voting by secret ballot with copy to all concerned, and shall appoint the observers. (3) (a) The returning Officer shall collect the names and particulars of employees working in the Industry Estts. And shall display the same in the notice boards of the employer, unions and also forward copies to all unions inviting objections/suggestions within a period of not less than ten days. (b) The final list of eligible workmen to participate in secret ballot voting shall be placed in the notice boards with copy to the employer and the unions at least 15 days before the date of ballot.” (Emphasis supplied) 8. (b) The final list of eligible workmen to participate in secret ballot voting shall be placed in the notice boards with copy to the employer and the unions at least 15 days before the date of ballot.” (Emphasis supplied) 8. A cumulative reading of the Rules leads to an irresist¬ible conclusion that before recognizing a union, it should be first determined as to who are the valid or members of the said union and for arriving at such conclusion, the only method pre¬scribed by the Legislature is to conduct a secret voting. This method has been adopted to circumvent the unholy attempt of the rival unions claiming that majority of employees are their mem¬bers. By secret ballot what is to be ascertained is as to how many out of total workmen are members of which union. Thus it is necessary to know as to who is a member. The word ‘member’ has been defined under Rule 2(g) of the Rules and reads as follows :- “Member” means a person who is an ordinary member of a union and has paid the subscription to the union at least for a whole period of three months immediately preceding the calendar month in which a request has been made by the union to the State Imple¬mentation and Evaluation Officer for recognition.” This being the position of law, we feel that the Returning Officer-cum-District Labour Officer, Balasore, opposite party No.2 shall do well to first determine as to who are the valid members of the unions and confine the election to such valid members only. For the said purpose, the said opposite party shall consider the objections filed by the rival unions to the list of employees furnished by the employer M/s. Birla Tyres vis-a-vis the list of members furnished by each Union and after hearing the objections, if any, strike off the names of those workmen who are not members or have ceased to be the members having not satisfied the criteria prescribed under Sub-rule 2(g) of the Rules and thereafter prepare the list of valid members who should take part in the secret ballot. In order to avoid multiplicity of proceed¬ings, this Court directs that all the unions shall file their respective lists of members and also the objections, if any, to the list of workmen already supplied to them, vide Annexure-6 dated 29th March, 2005 within six weeks hence. In order to avoid multiplicity of proceed¬ings, this Court directs that all the unions shall file their respective lists of members and also the objections, if any, to the list of workmen already supplied to them, vide Annexure-6 dated 29th March, 2005 within six weeks hence. The unions which have already filed objections need not file any further objection and the objections filed earlier shall be taken into considera¬tion. After considering the said objections the authority con¬cerned shall prepare and publish the voter list of members who are eligible to vote and thereafter proceed. It should be kept in mind that as all the employees of the establishment are not voters, the election is to be confined only to the employees who are valid members of any of the unions. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months if there will be no impediment. P. K. MOHANTY, J. I agree. Petition disposed of.