1991 PLP 502 (PLC)

Ch. Maarif for Petitioner. S.M. Yaqoob for Respondents. Abdullah industries Shama Workers Union (Regd.) claims that its members are employees of Messrs Abdullah Industries. Since they did not get benefits such as cost of living allowances, overtime at double the ordinary rates, leave encashment, attendance allowance, registration with social security institution and EOBI, they formed the abovenamed union which came to be I registered on 1-10-1990 at Serial No. 6170 by Registrar Trade Unions, Sindh. Such information was communicated to the respondent who were so annoyed that they hardened their attitude towards the union, called its officers and threatened them of dire consequences if they did not join hands with them to undo it. On their refusal, the respondents started a campaign of harrassment against them and tried to obtain their signatures and thumb-impressions on three blank papers for use as and when necessary. There is ever-increasing apprehension that the respondents would remove machines and thereby reduce number of workers and deprive workers of benefits accruing under law. They have already removed workers and officers of the union for achieving this object. The above facts constitute unfair labour practice according to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner also filed an application on which following prohibitory order was passed under sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 32:-- "Notice. Meanwhile respondents and persons connected with them are directed not to terminate or remove any workman from service by way of unfair labour practice and to conduct their affairs in a manner calculated to avoid occurrence of unfair labour practice:"

3. The respondents have filed comments and counter-affidavit denying relationship of employer and employee. Status of the petitioner and its right to sue has also been challenged. It is averred that no cause of action has accrued to the petitioner. It is alleged that the members of petitioner are employees of a contractor who on determination of his contract with respondent No.l terminated their services and settled their dues. The workers litigated with the contractor unsuccessfully whereafter they changed the name of their union from `Contractors of Abdullah Industries Shama Workers Union' to `Abdullah Industries Shama Workers Union' by simply deleting word `contractors' from its erstwhile name and applied for its registration on 7-1-1991. Without waiting for registration of the; change in terms of S.6 of the I.R.O. 1969, the union filed this application on the same day which is not maintainable.

4. Mr. S.M. Yaqoob, Advocate pressed for immediate hearing of his preliminary legal objections as prohibitory order is operating against respondents who deny relationship of master and servant between parties. As Mr. Ch. Maarif, Representative for the respondents had no objection to this proposal, I have heard them at length.

5. The certificate of registration of the union and letter dated 28-1-1990 informing contractor about its formation, produced by the petitioner alongwith the petition contain specific admission that its members are employees of the contractors and not of the respondents. Unless it is shown that they subsequently became employees of the respondents mere change in the name of union cannot bring about the change in the relationship of parties. There is no averment to this effect in the petition. There being no relationship of employer and employee between parties as is evident from petitioners own documents, the petition is not maintainable.

6. The registered trade union is `Contractors of Abdullah of Abdullah Industries Shama Workers Union' which is body corporate and competent to sue or be sued under section 14 of the I.R.O., 1969. Abdullah Industries Shama Workers Union is not a registered trade union. It had applied for registration of its changed name but before its registration this petition was filed. Constitution of the Union also does not appear to have been appropriately changed to justify the change in the name. Section 14 of the I.R.O. confers the status of body corporate on a registered trade union and enables it to sue or be sued. It follows that a person who is not body corporate cannot sue. The petition is incompetent on this ground also.

7. Unfair labour practice is committed when an employer or a trade union of employers or a person acting on behalf of either, imposes any condition in the contract of employment restraining the right of a party to such contract to join or continue his membership of a trade union; or refuses to employ or refuses to continue to employ any person or discriminates against any person in regard to any employment, promotion, condition of employment or working conditions on the ground that such person is, or is not, a member or officer of a trade union, or dismisses, discharges or removes from employment or transfers or threatens to dismiss, discharge, remove from employment or transfer a workman or injures or threatens to injure him in respect of his employment by reason that he is or proposes to become or seeks to persuade any other person to become a member or officer of a trade union or participates in the promotion, formation or activities or a trade union or induces any person to refrain from becoming or cease to be a member or an officer of trade union, by conferring or offering to confer any, advantage on, or by procuring or offering to procure any advantage for such person or any other person or compels or attempts to compel any officer of the C.B.A. to arrive at a settlement by using intimidation, coercion, pressure, threat, confinement to a place, physical injury, disconnection of water, power and telephone facilities and such other methods; interferes with or in any way influences the ballotting provided for in section 22, recruits any new workmen during the period of notice of strike under section 28 or during currency of strike which is not illegal or closes down whole of establishment in contravention of S.O.11-A of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 or commences, continues, instigates or incites others to take part in, or expend or supply money or otherwise act in furtherance or support of, an illegal lockout. Now, even if all the allegations made in this petition are taken to be gospel truth, none of the ingredients of section 15 of the I.R.O. reproduced above would seem to have been made out and no relief can be granted to the petitioner. For the reasons stated above this petition is rejected. M.Y.H./169/N.I.R.C. Petition dismissed.