1997 PLP 181 (PLC)

‑‑‑‑Ss. 22‑A(12), 15 & 53‑‑‑Grievance petition under Ss. 22‑A(12), 15 & 53, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 alongwith application for grant of ad interim injunction dismissed by Labour Court on the ground that main petition was couched in general terms which did not call in question any specific order, causing any particular grievance or grouse against petitioner union or its members‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Basis of request made in grievance petition were only apprehensions or fears of employees who thought they would be transferred on large scale by management, in order to smash their lawful trade union activities‑‑‑Petitioners, unless, pinpointed mala fide motives or ulterior intentions, expressed in manifest manner; malice or vindictiveness on the part of management could not be assumed‑‑‑Petitioners' apprehension, however, if well‑founded or likely to be translated into reality they could seek remedy from National Industrial Relations Commission‑‑‑Order of Labour Court was maintained in circumstances. Asmat Kamal Khan for Appellant Ch. Fazal Elahi for Respondents. Date of hearing: 18th July, 1996 The appeal is directed against an order dated 26‑6‑1996, rendered by the Punjab Labour Court No. 3, Lahore, at Ferozewala, by which the main petition of the United Bank Limited Employees' Union, filed under section 34 read with sections 22‑A(12), 15 and 53 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, on 10‑6‑1996, alongwith an application for grant of ad interim injunction, has been dismissed.

2. The learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court has held, and rightly so, that the main petition is couched in general terms and does not call in question any specific order, causing a particular grievance or grouse to the union or its members. The basis of the request made are only apprehensions or fears of the employees, who think, they will be transferred on a large scale by the management, in order to smash their lawful trade I union activities. Unless, however, the appellant body can lay hands upon or pinpoint mala fide motives or ulterior intentions, expressed in a manifest manner, it cannot just be assumed or taken for granted that the management is imbued with malice or vindictiveness. Well, if indeed, the apprehensions of the union are well‑founded, and the alleged intentions entertained by the management are likely to be translated into reality, in no distant future, it is open to the union to approach the N.I.R.C. for curbing or restraining apprehended acts of alleged unfair labour practice.

3. I do not find myself inclined, in the least, to interfere with the impugned decision delivered by the Labour Court, which is hereby upheld. The appeal has no merit and is dismissed with costs. A.A./858/Lb.P???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Appeal dismissed ???????????