Judgment :- 1. The prayer in the writ petition is for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner union to put up notice boards for communicating its union activities, to conduct meetings inside the office premises after obtaining permission with the authorities concerned, to take up the grievances of its members to the authorities concerned and all democratically permitted privileges available to the recognized and other applicant unions, to the petitioner Union. 2. The petitioner is a Trade Union registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926. The employees of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited [BSNL] are its members. The petitioner-Union came into existence during the year 2011. According to the petitioner, the BSNL conducts verification process and recognise trade unions, who have 15% of the employees as its members. The last verification took place in the year 2009 and at that time, the petitioner-Union was not in existence. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner, that the unions, which did not get recognition also can make representations. In the letter dated 18.02.2009 issued by the General Manager (SR), BSNLC.O., it is stated that even if a representation from the non-recognised union contain issues of vital importance, the same would be taken cognizance of and appropriate action will be taken. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner-union had put up Notice Boards at the following nine places, viz., "1. Kush Kumar RoadOffice, Sterling Road, GM(D) Office 2. Greames Road Office now shifted to Anna Road DGM(C ) 3. Ambattur Exchange, DGM-Ambattur 4. Flower Bazaar Exchange, DGM (NE) 5. CTO, Chennai 6. K.K.Nagar SDE (Extension I) 7. Kancheepuram Main Exchange 8. Tambaram Exchange 9. Tiruthani Exchange however, the Notice Boards displayed at the above mentioned premises have been unilaterally removed by the Establishment. The petitioner has also enclosed the letters dated 17.12.2011 issued by SDE/BP (Admn) and AGM Central, Chennai-6 directing the petitioner-union to remove the Notice Board installed in the Ground Floor of HRD Admin.Bldg.No.2, Kushkumar Road, Chennai-34 and at the O/o.DGM (NWO) Central Chennai-6 respectively. Similar orders have also been issued to remove the notice boards installed at Ambattur Exchange, Flower Bazaar Exchange etc." 5. Similar orders have also been issued to remove the notice boards installed at Ambattur Exchange, Flower Bazaar Exchange etc." 5. The petitioner union has filed the present writ petition praying for a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to put up Notice Boards for communicating its activities to their members and also to conduct meetings inside the office premises after obtaining permission from the authorities concerned and also to take up the grievances of its members to the authorities. 6. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit refuting the allegations. 7. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the next verification process will take place during the end of this month or during the month of February 2013 for which the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner-union will participate in the same. 8. In para No.9 of their counter, the respondents have stated that the unions, which participated in the verification process during the year 2009 were permitted to conduct meetings at the areas identified by the department, beyond office hours and they are called as applicant unions. Since the petitioner-union was not the applicant-Union, they were not allowed to put up Notice Boards and other facilities as prayed for in this writ petition. 9. Heard both sides. 10. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a Trade Union registered under the Trade Unions Act and it has been functioning from the year 2011. When the verification of membership for recognition of Unions took place during the year 2009, the petitioner union was not in existence. Therefore, the petitioner is not an applicant-Union. The applicant unions are even permitted to hold meeting in areas identified by the Department in the office premises beyond office hours. 11. Para No.9 of the counter affidavit is extracted here under: "With regard to averments made in para 10 of the affidavit, it is submitted that the respondent had convened a meeting on 05.04.2010 with all the applicant unions to ensure to follow the code of conduct and discipline in order to maintain industrial peace and decorum in the office premises. Further some areas were identified to conduct meeting beyond office hours. As the petitioner had not obtained the applicant status till today he was not allowed to conduct the meeting inside the office premises. Further some areas were identified to conduct meeting beyond office hours. As the petitioner had not obtained the applicant status till today he was not allowed to conduct the meeting inside the office premises. However, it is submitted that during verification process the facilities extended to applicant unions will also be extended to the petitioner union if they attain the applicant status and if notified by the BSNL corporate office till verification process is over." 12. Since it is submitted by the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents that the next verification process will take place during the end of this month or during the month of February 2013, petitioner-union may participate in the same. 13. As far as the prayer relating to making representation by the petitioner union to the authorities concerned to hold meeting or to take up the grievance of the members are concerned, it is open for them to make such representation and it is for the respondent-Department to either act upon or reject the same as disclosed in their letter dated 18.02.2009. In the letter dated 18.02.2009, the General Manager (SR) BSNL CO had stated that the recognised representative union has been given right to take up the issues /grievances of its members and this facility is not available to the non-recognised unions. However, this does not prevent the non-recognised unions from making any references to the management and it will take cognizance of those representation provided it contains issue of vital importance. 14. In view of the above, this court is of the view that any body can make a representation to the authorities concerned. Hence, no direction need be issued to the respondents in this regard. However, taking into account the fact that the verification is to take place shortly and that the petitioner-union has already put up notice Boards, the respondents were not correct in removing the same. 15. The learned counsel for the petitioner-union submitted that if they are directed to put up the Notice Board at a different place as identified by the respondent-Department, the petitioner-union is willing to comply with the same. According to him, the petitioner union cannot be deprived of opportunities in putting up the Notice Board to communicate with its members. 16. In my view, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard is well-founded. According to him, the petitioner union cannot be deprived of opportunities in putting up the Notice Board to communicate with its members. 16. In my view, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard is well-founded. If the petitioner-union is not permitted by the respondent-Department to put up the Notice Board while others are permitted, it would amount to discrimination between the two and the petitioner-union will not be able to communicate to its members and other employees by way of notice. The same also would defeat the very purpose of the Trade Union. At the same time, it is also made clear that the petitioner-union cannot have any benefit that is available to the recognised union except putting up of the Notice Board at the places earmarked by the respondent-Department. The respondents are directed to earmark the places for putting up the Notice Board by the petitioner-union within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the petitioner-union shall put up the Notice Board only at those places. 17. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid manner. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.