1973 PLP 396 (PLC)

Held: The prosecution case is that the factory was being run with the help of those persons who have not been shown in the register of adult workers. It is correct that the Chairman and the Director of the company, as also the chaukidars and van drivers, have not been cite i as workers in the relevant register. That being the position, none of them could be called "worker" as defined in section 2(xxviii) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Considering that the factory was being run wit4 the help of those who were not shown on the register of adult workers, there hag been a breach of the provision of section 15 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The accused are, therefore, guilty of offence under sec tion 53 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. However, in view of the fact that no new worker from outside was employed, it would be fair to take lenient view of the matter. On 17th February 1973, the complainant Abdul Qadir, who claims to be the General Secretary of the Popular Tobacco Company Workers' Union, lodged a complaint before the National Industrial Relations Commission, alleging therein that Syed Nazir Ali, Chairman and two Directors namely Bashir Ali and Kabir Ali of the Popular Tobacco Company Limited, Karachi, have recreited new workers during the currency of the strike by the workers and as such have contravened the provisions of section 15 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, and that, therefore, they may be dealt with according to law.

2. The statement of the complainant was recorded on 1st.March 1973, and thereafter, respondents (accused) were directed to submit their comments, they accordingly appeared on 3rd March 1973, and filed "reply statement".

3. At the trial, the statements of Abdul Qadir (P. W. 1) Muhammad Qasim Ali (P. W. 2) and Mr. Muzaffar Ali Shah, Assistant Director, Labour Welfare, Karachi (P. W. 3) were recorded. It is a common ground between the parties that on 19th October 1972, workers of the Popular Tobacco Company Limited formed a Trade Union under the name and style of "Popular Tobacco Company Workers' Union", which was duly registered, the same day, by the Registrar, Trade Unions, Sind, Karachi, Thereafter, tile workers served a Schedule of demands on the Management. Since the bilateral negotiations failed, the wor kers served a notice of strike on the Management. Simultaneously, with the service of the notice referred to above, they also delivered a copy thereof to the Conciliator. Eventually, no settlement was arrived at between the parties during the course of conciliation proceedings, with the result that the workers commenced strike from 25th January 1973.

4. On 1st February 1973, the, complainant matte an application to the Deputy Director, Labour Welfare, Govern ment of Sind, Karachi (Exh. PB) mentioning therein that the management have recruited new workers after the commencement of the legal strike, which is an offence under the Law. There upon. Mr. Muzaffar Ali Shah, Assistant Director, Labour Welfare. Karachi was deputed to "enquire and report". He accordingly visited the factory on 3rd February 1973, and found 9 persons working in the factory. Of these, 5 were workers, one Chaukidar and 2 Directors besides the Chairman, (the latter 3 are accused in this care). He accordingly submitted his report (Exh. PC). Later, he again visited the factory on 16th February 1973, and found 11 persons working. He however, categorically stated that no new workers had been recruited from outside. The factory, therefore, was being run by the 3 accussed and 5 workers, besides one Chaukidar and 2 van drivers. The Assistant Director, Labour Welfare in his statement before this Commission made it dear that the name of the van drivers, Chaukidar and the Directors, including the Chairman, are not mentioned in the register of adult workers. Defence case.

5. All the 3 accused admitted that the number of workers in the factory is

25. Of these, 19 commenced strike on 25th January 1973, and the remaining 6 did not participate therein. They further stated that with the help of workers (who had not participated 'in the strike; besides Chaukidar and van drivers, the factory was kept working. The accused claim that they were expert mechanic and as such could run the machines. Briefly stated, they contended that no new workers had been recruited after .the commencement of the strike and that, there fore, they were not guilty of the offence with which they have been charged.

6. The defence case as detailed above is supported by ‑ an Independent witness, Mr. Muzaffar Ali Shah. Assistant Director, Labour Welfare, Karachi (P. W. 3). Needless to recapitulate, that he visited the site twice and found that the factory was being run with the help of the workers, as alto the 3 accused besides the Chaukidar and van drivers. He categorically deposed that no new workers has' been recruited from outside. The other two P. Ws. namely Abdul Qadir and Muhammad Qasim Ali, have not been able to substantiate the plea that new workers had been recruited after the commencement of the strike.

7. Shorn of redundancies, the prosecution case 9s that the factory was being run with the help of those persons who have not been shown in the register of adult workers. It to correct that the Chairman and the Directors of the company, as also the Chaukidars and van drivers, have not been cited as workers in the relevant register. That being the position, none of them could be called "Worker" as defined in section 2(sxv1it) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The question for determination is whether or not the accused, have contravened the provisions of section 15 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Considering that the factory was being run with the help of those (except 6 workers) who were not shown on the register of adult workers, these has been a breach of the provision of section 15 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. I accordingly hold the accused guilty of offence under section 53 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. However, in view of the fact that no new worker from outside was employed I take a very lenient view of the matter. Ad such I convict the three accused, namely (1) Syed Nazir Ali, (2) Bashir Ali and (3) Kabir Ali under section 53 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 and sentence each of them to one day's simple imprisonment, till the rising of the Court, together with a fine of Rs. 500 (Rs. Five hundred) each] in case of default in payment of fine, each shall undergo three months' R. I.