2011 PLP 247 (PLC)

CH. SHAUKAT NAWAZ GORAYA (MEMBER).

The petitioner has brought this petition under section 25(8)(g) read with section 17 of the IRA, 2008 against the respondents. It has been contended that petitioner and other co-workers formed a union namely UBL Progressive Employees Union (Punjab, Islamabad and N.-W.F.P.). The union was registered on 2-9-2010. The respondents were opposing the formation of this union but same was registered against their wishes. The respondents have turned hostile against the petitioner due to his lawful trade union activities. In order to victimize him he has been repeatedly transferred through various orders which have been mentioned in para 4 of the petition. It is further alleged that by committing further unfair labour practice the respondents have withheld petitioner's increment w.e.f. January, 2010. No disciplinary proceedings are pending against him. It is alleged that actions of the respondents are illegal, void, invalid, without lawful authority revengeful and amount to committing of unfair labour practice. Along with the main petition an application for issuance of temporary injunction has been filed.

2. The petition and the stay application were vehemently resisted by the respondents. Inter alia it was contended that present case pertains to Punjab where Punjab Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2010 has been promulgated and in the said Ordinance there is no provision of NIRC, therefore, this Commission has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the instant petition. It has been further alleged that no unfair labour practice was committed against the petitioner. His transfer orders were made due to exigency of service.

3. I heard arguments of the learned counsel for the parties on the stay application and examined relevant record.

4. I would like to take the preliminary objection of the respondents regarding jurisdiction of this Commission first. The Division Bench of honourable Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in ICA No. 200 of 2010 held that IRA, 2008 holds field till 30th June, 2011 by virtue of saving clause of 18th Amendment therefore, objection regarding jurisdiction of this Commission is without any substance and it is held that this Commission has the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the instant petition.

5. The respondents have attached copy of Circular No. 1675 dated 1-2-2010 as Annex-R/1 under which it was clearly stated that non-conferment of increments or allowances will not be paid to those employees against whom disciplinary action/litigation was in process. It was argued by the learned counsel for the respondents that this has been the consistent policy of the respondent Bank for a number of years and same was not a recent development. The petitioner had filed his grievance petition before the learned Labour Court No. 4, Faisalabad and due to this reason the increment of the petitioner was withheld w.e.f January, 2010 and now the petition which was pending before the learned Labour Court No. 4 Faisalabad has been dismissed vide order dated 15-5-2010 therefore, the reason for withholding the increment of the petitioner is no more available to the respondents.

6. In the entire petition wild and general allegations of unfair labour practice have been levelled against the respondents. No specific incidents or witnesses have been cited in the pleadings. Initiation of disciplinary actions, termination, demotion or transfer etc. are all statutory and legal rights of the employer therefore, the transfer orders of the petitioner cannot be termed as result of unfair labour practice. The examination of record further reveals that petitioner was promoted as Officer Grade-III but he did not accept his promotion as he was well aware that on promotion he would cease to be a member/officer bearer of a trade union of workmen.

7. In the light of what has been stated above, it is held that petitioner has made out an arguable case to the extent that he is entitled to his increment and other allowances which were withheld by the respondents. Therefore, the stay application is disposed of with the observation that respondents are directed to release the increment and other allowances of the petitioner forthwith which were withheld due to his grievance petition pending before the learned Labour Court Faisalabad as same has been dismissed. H.B.T./7/NIRC Order accordingly.