Question

Decide which of the following propositions can be most reasonably inferred through the application of the stated legal rules to the facts of this case:

• A. The employment contract offered to Monitul Alam to join GMS is legal as it does not restrict his freedom not to join any association.
• B. The condition requiring Monitul Alam to join GMS cannot bind him as it impinges on his freedom not to join any association.
• C. Syed Monirul Alam cannot claim a fundamental right to freedom of association against Gajodhar Pharmaceuticals and therefore, the contract would bind him even though his freedom of association is restricted.
• D. The employment contract infringes Syed Monirul Alam’s freedom to decide with whom to associate and therefore is legally not enforceable.
• A. Such a law would merely govern private action to which fundamental rights do not apply.
• B. Such a law would not curtail any individual's right to freedom of association.
• C. Neither the employment contract, nor the law of the parliament would be enforceable as they would curtail the freedom of association.
• D. The law of parliament would violate an individual’s freedom not to join any association and therefore be unconstitutional.
• A. Such a law would not infringe any fundamental right to freedom of association.
• B. The law of the parliament would curtail an individual’s right not to join any association.
• C. Such a law would curtail the union members’ right to decide with whom they would like to associate.
• D. Such a law would render the employment contract offered by Gajodhar Pharmaceuticals to Syed Monirul Alam unenforceable.
• A. The agreement would be illegal as it would curtail the union members’ right to decide with whom they would like to associate.
• B. Such an agreement would infringe the union’s right to decide with whom to associate and therefore is legally not enforceable.
• C. The agreement would not be enforceable as it would infringe upon the employer’s right not to join an association.
• D. The constitutionality of this agreement cannot be contested on grounds of contravention of fundamental rights as such rights are not applicable to private persons.
• A. The legislation would not violate the right to freedom of association.
• B. The legislation would curtail the right of trade unions to strike, and therefore violate freedom of association.
• C. Since strike is only one of the objectives with which a trade union is formed, right to strike is not protected by the right to freedom of association.
• D. None of these

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Step 1: Identify relevant rules from the problem - Rule A: Right to form or not join any association is a fundamental right. - Rule B: Includes the right to decide with whom to associate. - Rule D: Fundamental rights apply only to laws made by or administrative actions of the State, not private persons. Step 2: Apply rules to the given facts - The employment contract was offered by Gajodhar Pharmaceuticals — a private company. - The condition imposed was that Syed Monirul Alam must join a specific trade union. - This appears to conflict with Rules A and B, which allow one to not join or to choose whom to associate with. - However, Rule D clearly states that fundamental rights cannot be claimed against private entities. Step 3: Eliminate incorrect options - (a) Incorrect: This assumes the clause is legal because it doesn’t restrict freedom. But the contract does restrict the freedom not to join. ✗ - (b) Incorrect: The contract may impinge on freedom, but fundamental rights do not apply to private contracts (Rule D). ✗ - (c) Correct: Directly applies Rule D. Monirul Alam cannot enforce fundamental rights against a private company, so the contract is binding. ✓ - (d) Incorrect: Rule B supports the right to decide with whom to associate, but Rule D prevents enforcement of this against private parties. ✗ % Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{(c)}} \]

Answer 2

Step 1: Recall the applicable rules

Rule A: Freedom of association includes the right not to join any association.
Rule E: Any law in contravention of fundamental rights is unconstitutional.
Rule D: Fundamental rights apply to actions by the State or Parliament.

Step 2: Apply rules to the given scenario - Here, it is not a private contract — the Parliament enacts a law mandating employees to join a particular union. - Therefore, Rule D applies — fundamental rights apply to this law. - The law forces individuals to join an association, thus violating the freedom not to join under Rule A. - Hence, per Rule E, such a law is unconstitutional. Step 3: Eliminate incorrect options - (a) Incorrect: The law is made by Parliament, not a private party, so fundamental rights DO apply. ✗ - (b) Incorrect: The law does curtail the freedom not to join. ✗ - (c) Incorrect: Partly true, but vague. The law is the problem, and contract enforcement is secondary. ✗ - (d) Correct: Matches Rules A, D, and E precisely. ✓ % Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{(d)}} \]

Answer 3

Step 1: Recall applicable legal rules

Rule B: The right to freedom of association includes the freedom to decide with whom to associate.
Rule A: Includes the right to form or not join an association.
Rule D: Fundamental rights apply to laws made by the State or Parliament.

Step 2: Understand the implication of the law described in the question - The Parliament is now making a law that forces a trade union to accept all employees as members. - This doesn’t force the individuals to join the union — instead, it forces the union to accept anyone. - Hence, the issue is not individual freedom to not join, but the union's freedom to choose with whom it wants to associate. Step 3: Apply Rule B to the union's situation - Since unions are associations of individuals, they too enjoy the freedom to decide who joins them. - By mandating that the union must accept all employees, the law curtails their right under Rule B. Step 4: Eliminate incorrect options - (a) Incorrect: It does infringe the fundamental right — of the union to choose members. - (b) Incorrect: This law does not force individuals to join, so it does not affect their freedom not to join. - (c) Correct: It infringes on the union’s freedom to associate with chosen individuals. - (d) Incorrect: There is no mention that the contract becomes invalid due to this rule. Irrelevant. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{(c)}} \]

Answer 4

Step 1: Review the applicable rules

Rule B: The fundamental right to freedom of association includes the right to decide with whom to associate.
Rule D: Fundamental rights apply only to laws made by or administrative actions of the State and do not apply to actions of private persons.
Rule E: Any law in contravention of fundamental rights is unconstitutional and cannot bind any person.

Step 2: Apply the rules to the facts - Gajodhar Pharmaceuticals is a private company. It makes an agreement with GMS that it will hire only existing members of GMS. - This agreement forces the union (GMS) to accept as members only those whom the company wishes to employ. - Therefore, this limits the union’s ability to freely decide who its members are. Step 3: Analyze each option - (a) Incorrect: This uses the word “illegal,” but legality here depends on enforceability — and the more accurate issue is about enforceability, not a legal penalty. ✗ - (b) Correct: The agreement infringes the union’s freedom of association — specifically, Rule B. Therefore, the agreement is not enforceable. ✓ - (c) Incorrect: The agreement does not force the employer to join any association — hence, the employer’s rights are not violated. ✗ - (d) Incorrect: Even though private actors are involved, the agreement still violates Rule B, which makes the contract unenforceable, even if not unconstitutional. ✗ % Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{(b)}} \]

Answer 5

Step 1: Identify relevant rules applicable

Rule A: The fundamental right to freedom of association includes the right to form or not join an association.
Rule B: Includes the freedom to decide with whom to associate.
Rule C: The right does not extend to the right to realize the objectives of forming the association.

Step 2: Understand the implication of Rule C - Rule C clearly states that freedom of association does not include the right to realize the objectives of forming the association. - One objective of forming trade unions is to strike — i.e., collective bargaining and industrial action. Step 3: Apply rules to the scenario - The law passed by Parliament prohibits strikes — an objective of the union. - But since Rule C excludes such objectives from protection under freedom of association, banning strikes does not violate the right to freedom of association. Step 4: Analyze options - (a) Correct: The legislation bans an objective (strike), not the association itself. Hence, it does not violate the right to freedom of association. ✓ - (b) Incorrect: Contradicts Rule C — objectives (like strike) are not protected. ✗ - (c) Incorrect framing: It claims strike is only one objective, but again, Rule C says none of the objectives are protected. Still, option (a) is clearer. ✗ - (d) Incorrect: Option (a) is clearly valid, so "none of these" is false. ✗ % Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{(a)}} \]