2000 PLP 209 (PLC)
PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIONS STAFF UNION Versus N.I.R.C., ISLAMABAD and 3 others
| Citation | 2000 PLP 209 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian, C.J., Sh. Riaz Ahmed and Ch. Muhammad Arif. JJ |
| Parties | PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIONS STAFF UNION Versus N.I.R.C., ISLAMABAD and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP 209 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP 209 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Ajmal Mian, C.J., Sh. Riaz Ahmed and Ch. Muhammad Arif. JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 209 (PLC) (PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIONS STAFF UNION Versus N.I.R.C., ISLAMABAD and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ----Ss. 22 & 22-A---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 185(3) & 199-- Referendum for election of Collective Bargaining Agent---Union which remained unsuccessful in Referendum, filed objection before National Industrial Relations Commission with regard to illegalities and irregularities allegedly committed by Returning Officer---Pending objection petition, Union filed Constitutional petition before High Court challenging Referendum---High Court disposed of Constitutional petition with observations that National Industrial Relations Commission would try to dispose of objection petition of Union on next date of hearing and .thereafter if need be, Union would be free to avail remedy provided under law, subject to all just exceptions---National Industrial Relations Commission having not decided objection petition of Union in terms of order of High Court, respondent union filed Constitutional petition before High Court wherein they obtained stay of proceedings pending before National Industrial Relations Commission---Validity---High Court was not justified in: staying proceedings through its interlocutory order passed in Constitutional petition filed by respondent Union as same ran counter to order passed by High Court in Constitutional petition earlier filed by petitioner Union whereby National Industrial Relations Commission was directed to dispose of objection petition of petitioner Union---Order suspending proceedings pending before National Industrial Relations Commission passed by High Court in subsequent Constitutional petition of respondent-Union was set aside, in circumstances.
- Mian Bashir Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- M. Asghar Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz M. Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.3.
- Date of hearing: 25th June, 1998.
- Mian Bashir Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Zaidi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- M. Asghar Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz M. Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.3.
- AJMAL MIAN, C.J.‑‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order dated 9‑6‑1998 of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No. 11130 of 1998 filed by respondent No.3 challenging the proceedings pending before respondent No. 1. The learned Judge in Chamber while admitting the above petition has also stayed the proceedings before respondent No. 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for leave to appeal and when the matter was placed before his Lordship in Chamber the notice was ordered to be issued to the respondents. In response to the above notice Mr. M. Asghar Malik, learned counsel for respondent No.3, is present.
- "In view of the fact that objection petition is already pending before the National Industrial Relations Commission, we accept the request as made by Mr. Shakeel Ahmed, Advocate and dispose of the petition in terms that on next date of hearing, the National Industrial Relations Commission shall try to dispose of the objections filed by petitioners and if thereafter, need be, petitioners will be free to avail such remedy provided under the law, subject to all just exceptions."
- We have heard Mian Bashir Zafar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. Asghar Malik, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 9-6-1998 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 11130 of 1998). Maulvi Anwarul Haq, Deputy Attorney-General (on Notice). JUDGMENT
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, C.J.‑‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order dated 9‑6‑1998 of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No. 11130 of 1998 filed by respondent No.3 challenging the proceedings pending before respondent No.
1. The learned Judge in Chamber while admitting the above petition has also stayed the proceedings before respondent No.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for leave to appeal and when the matter was placed before his Lordship in Chamber the notice was ordered to be issued to the respondents. In response to the above notice Mr. M. Asghar Malik, learned counsel for respondent No.3, is present. The brief facts are that a referendum for electing the Collective Bargaining Agent was held on 14‑4‑1998 but the result was declared on 21‑4‑1998. It appears that the petitioner and respondent No.3 participated in the above referendum. The result indicated that respondent No.3 has won the referendum by obtaining 22230 votes as against the present petitioner who obtained 19483 votes. However, it may be stated that the petitioner had filed objections on 21‑4‑1998 before the National Industrial Relations Commission alleging therein that the Returning Officer has committed some illegalities and irregularities. The above objections 'were pending when the petitioner approached the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta through Constitutional Petition No. 122 of 1998 challenging the above referendum. The above petition was disposed of on 20‑5‑1998 in the following terms:‑‑ "In view of the fact that objection petition is already pending before the National Industrial Relations Commission, we accept the request as made by Mr. Shakeel Ahmed, Advocate and dispose of the petition in terms that on next date of hearing, the National Industrial Relations Commission shall try to dispose of the objections filed by petitioners and if thereafter, need be, petitioners will be free to avail such remedy provided under the law, subject to all just exceptions." It seems that in terms of the above order of the High Court respondent No. l has not yet decided the above objections to, the referendum filed by the petitioner. Respondent No.3 filed above fresh Constitutional petition in which they obtained stay of the proceedings pending before the National Industrial Relations Commission. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present petition for leave to appeal. We have heard Mian Bashir Zafar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. Asghar Malik, learned counsel for respondent No.3. In our view, the learned Judge in Chamber was not justified in staying the proceedings through interlocutory order dated 9‑6‑1998 passed in above Writ Petition No. 11130 of 1998 as it runs counter to above order dated 25‑5‑1998 which was passed in the earlier Constitutional petition namely Civil Petition No 122 of 1998 and whereby respondent No. l was directed to dispose of the objections. We, therefore, convert the above petition into appeal and set aside the above suspension order. However, it will be open to both the parties to agitate whatever factual and legal pleas available to them before respondent No.
1. H.B.T./P‑34/S Appeal accepted.