A 38-year-old filmmaker from Bengal has done what her seniors in the industry have been trying for years — she has managed to put a check on the alleged interference of film technicians federation in directors’ work on Tollywood sets.
Based on a writ petition filed by filmmaker Bidula Bhattacharjee, Justice Amrita Sinha of the Calcutta high court on Thursday said the Federation of Cine Technicians and Workers of Eastern India, headed by Trinamool minister Aroop Biswas’ brother Swarup, from “interfering with the independent functioning of the petitioner in performing work and none of the fundamental right to life and livelihood and the right to carry on business.”
For years in bits and pieces the filmmakers and several others involved with the industry have been trying to raise their voice against the alleged interference of the Biswas brothers, who have successively headed the federation since the change of guard in Bengal in 2011.
Bidula Bhattacharjee (Facebook/bidula.bhattacharjee)
Bidula Bhattacharjee — the maker of Prem Amar 2 and Golper Mayajal — had filed a petition which was supported by actor-directors Parambrata Chattopadhyay, Anirban Bhattacharya, filmmakers Sudeshna Roy, Subrata Sen (also the lead functionaries of the Directors’ Association of Eastern India) and 10 others against the federation.
The petition stated, members of the Directors Association of Eastern India (DAEI) had been denied access to health insurance and allegedly blacklisted by other trade guilds under pressure from the federation.
The federation had succeeded in weaning away a section of the filmmakers from the Directors Association of Eastern India, which has tried to raise its voice time and again since last July when a filmmaker Rahool Mukherjee was blacklisted for going to shoot in Bangladesh. The strike that ensued the federation’s decision was temporarily resolved after chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s intervention though the fissures remained.
In her ruling, Justice Sinha has asked Bhattacharjee to direct all the grievances to the secretary of the information and cultural affairs department, headed by chief minister Mamata Banerjee, within a week. The I&CA department will submit a report within four weeks.
The case will come up for hearing on May 19.
“This is a very positive development,” said Sudeshna Roy, filmmaker and secretary of the Directors Association of Eastern India. “A code of conduct that does not exist has been imposed on us. This is not a game of one-upmanship. We are all struggling to create a better working environment. A union cannot make such rules.”
During the hearing the counsel for the federation had admitted before the Calcutta high court single bench the code of conduct which was adopted at a joint meeting of the Eastern India Motion Picture Association and the federation were for a “particular period of time” and are not “effective” at present.
The code of conduct warranted technicians/workers to carry a membership card issued by the several bodies affiliated to the federation, which was effective from May 1, 2012 to April 30 2015.
Though the code was invalid, the federation insisted on going by the same.
Despite repeated calls and texts, the federation president Swarup Biswas did not respond.
The DAEI president Subrata Sen and filmmaker Srijit Mukherji declined to comment.
Parambrata called the verdict a much-needed acknowledgement of a months-long struggle.
“We were being pushed to a corner,” Parambrata told The Telegraph Online. “Some of us had kept the conversation alive, and we were being targeted for it.”
Parambrata said they were left without any other option but to knock on the doors of the Calcutta high court as the efforts to open a dialogue with the federation yielded zero results.
“We were told a committee would be formed. We waited for months. Nothing happened,” said Parambrata. “Only filmmaker Gautam Ghose confirmed that no committee had actually been set up.”
As the stalemate continued, Parambrata alleged that those who remained vocal about reform—including himself and others from the DAEI—faced silent retaliation.
“Directors were being denied access to technicians, their affiliations weren’t being renewed, and even basic rights like health insurance were blocked despite meeting all government norms,” he said.
Parambrata clarified that the intention of the lawsuit was never to undermine the federation, which plays a crucial role in protecting technicians and ensuring fair work conditions.
“A trade union cannot impose unconstitutional codes or make one-sided decisions that cripple an entire industry,” he said. “The court has now said clearly that they don’t have the authority to issue a ‘code of conduct’ or impose bans.”
With the court stating that the federation has no controlling power over work permissions or welfare access, many in the industry see this as a turning point.
“We’re grateful the court listened—because for a long time, no one else would,” Parambrata said.