No company can prohibit a registered trade union from holding demonstration or sit-in (dharna) within its premises, even if it causes inconvenience or affects business, the Bombay high court has held.

A company can not even stop workers from sticking posters in the premises, said Justice J H Bhatia in his judgement last month.

The case involved eight workers' unions, including Bhartiya Vima Karmachari Sanghtana and New Indian Assurance Officers' Association on one side, and the New India Life Assurance Company Ltd on the other.

New India Assurance filed a suit in the lower civil court in 2005, alleging that unions were obstructing day-to-day functioning of the the company over the issue of transfer of two staff members.

It alleged that unions, in the course of their agitation, tried to intimidate the `loyal' workers and even manhandled senior managers on one occasion.

The company demanded that all the unions be permanently restrained from obstructing regular business and administration of work, from pasting banner/placards/posters, from holding demonstrations, dharnas or shouting slogans within the premises, or even within the radius of 500 metre.

The city civil court refused to entertain the suit, saying it had no jurisdiction over the issue. So New India moved the high court.

The high court held that unions have "legitimate right" to pressurise management, as long as their tactics are not violent.

Relying on section 18 of Trade Union Act, Justice J H Bhatia pointed out that as per the Act, no suit is tenable against a registered trade union for anything done "in contemplation of, or in furtherance of a trade dispute," as long as it is peaceful.

The company, by demanding a permanent restraining order against demonstrations and other forms of agitations, wanted to "take away completely the rights of the trade unions of making any agitation," the high court said.

Further, referring to demand that no demonstrations should be allowed within the premises and its vicinity, court said, "It is difficult to understand how that can be done," as demonstrating away from the company would make no sense.

The court also made it clear, that such agitations may cause some inconvenience, still the workers' right to agitate can not be curbed. "Though such activities including dharna may cause inconvenience to management and may also affect business. . . they cannot be suppressed," Justice Bhatia said.

Regarding allegations of manhandling of senior staff, court said that there was no specific police complaint, nor was anybody named in that regard. But, while dismissing the company's appeal, the court also added a caveat: "Once such activities become violent, protection (under Trade Union Act) is taken away."