JUDGMENT A.K. Shrivastava, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by Rastriya Soot Mill Mazdoor Sangh (hereinafter referred to as "Union") under section 11(4) of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 (in short "Act") against the order passed by the appellate authority dismissing the appeal. 2. Several contentions have been put-forth by learned Senior Counsel for the appellant by assailing the impugned order passed in Appeal No.2/I.T.U./1989 by President, Industrial Court of M.P. that the order is contrary to law. But, I am of the view that the contentions of learned Senior Counsel which are on merits cannot be accepted for the simple reason that this second appeal is not maintainable under section 11(4) of the Act. 3. The Registrar of Trade Union appointed under section 3 of the said Act has de-recognised and cancelled the registration of the Trade Union of the appellant. The said order of registration dated 23-3-1989 was assailed by appellant-Union by filing first appeal under section 11 of the said Act, which has been dismissed by the impugned order by learned Industrial Court. 4. On bare perusal of the M.P. State Amendment in section 11 of the Act, this Court finds that any person aggrieved by any refusal of the Registrar to register a Trade Union or by the withdrawal or cancellation of a certificate of registration may within thirty days from the communication of such order to the Trade Union concerned, appeal to the Industrial Court, whose decision shall be final. The M.P. State amendment was made applicable w.e.f. 31-12-1960, which would mean that on the date of passing of the order by Registrar on 23-3-1989 cancelling the registration of appellant-Union under the Act, it was in force and therefore rightly the first appeal was filed by appellant before learned Industrial Court, but, against the appellate order of the Industrial Court, second appeal is not permissible before this Court under the State Amendment to section 11 of the said Act. 5. Since there is no provision to file second appeal, this second appeal is not maintainable. Eventually, this second appeal is hereby dismissed as not maintainable. The appellant shall be free to assail the impugned order before appropriate forum. 6. The certified copy of the impugned order passed by learned Industrial Court may be returned to learned counsel for appellant and a photocopy thereof be retained in this file. 7. Eventually, this second appeal is hereby dismissed as not maintainable. The appellant shall be free to assail the impugned order before appropriate forum. 6. The certified copy of the impugned order passed by learned Industrial Court may be returned to learned counsel for appellant and a photocopy thereof be retained in this file. 7. This appeal is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.