1989 PLP 173 (PLC)

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑4 ‑00, ‑‑‑Ss. 25‑A(10), 36 & 38(3)‑‑Grievance petition‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑Presentation to proper forum‑‑Territorial jurisdiction of Labour Court‑‑Labour Court passing order that petition be returned for presentation to proper forum‑‑Appellate Tribunal while dismissing appeal against order of Labour Court holding that impugned termination challenged in grievance petition was perfectly justified and did not suffer from any illegality and thus dismissing petition itself on merits‑ Labour Court subsequently returning petition for presentation to proper forum‑ Petition itself having been dismissed by Appellate Authority, held, could not have been returned by Labour Court for presentation to proper Court. S.P. Lodhi for Applicants. Muhammad Humayun for Respondent. The applicants were employed in the respondent establishment and were said to have been terminated with effect from 1‑6‑1985. Aggrieved by this termination they filed their this petition under section 25‑A(10), I.R.O. 1969 before the Vth Labour Court, Karachi on 21‑8‑1985. After evidence this petition was ordered to be returned for presentation before the proper forum vide order, dated 16‑2‑1987, as the said Court had no jurisdiction. This order was then assailed in appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal but the appeal was also dismissed by order, dated 24‑11‑1987. It appears that after the orders of the Tribunal the original petition was returned by the Vth Labour Court to the applicants and so the said petition has now been tiled in this Court alongwith an application on 10 12‑1987. After service; the respondent has filed preliminary objections in regard to the maintainability of this petition. I have accordingly heard Mr. Muhammad Humayun, Advocate for the respondent and Mr. S.P. Lodhi, learned representative for the applicants. It has been contended by Mr. Humayun that no doubt the learned Vth Labour Court had ordered for the return of the petition for presentation before the competent Court but this order was assailed before the Tribunal where not only the observations as to the jurisdiction made by the learned Vth Labour court were upheld but the Tribunal also considered the merits of this case and finally concluded that the impugned termination order suffered from no illegality. Accordingly, the learned Tribunal dismissed the petition itself and so it cannot be re‑filed here as it is no more in existence. Mr. Lodhi, on the other hand, submits that the Tribunal has not considered the merits concerning all the applicants and so the present petition has rightly been returned by the Vth Labour Court and consequently presented in this Court. I have gone through the two orders passed by the Vth Labour Court as also the Tribunal. The learned Vth Labour Court had not considered the merits at all but it had confined itself to the point of jurisdiction and on coming to the conclusion that it had no jurisdiction, the return of the petition was ordered for presentation before competent Labour Court. However, the Hon'ble Tribunal not only considered the question of jurisdiction but also examined the merits of the case and while upholding the observations of the learned Labour Court in regard to the jurisdiction, also held that the impugned termination order was perfectly justified and did not suffer from any illegality. On the basis of such conclusions, the Hon'ble Tribunal dismissed the petition itself and so it has rightly been contended by Mr. Humayun that the petition itself having been dismissed by an Appellate Authority could not have been returned by the learned Labour Court and so it cannot be presented here. In fact, in view of the above, this petition having been dismissed by the Hon'ble Tribunal should not have been returned to the applicants. In any case, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal as referred to above this petition is not maintainable in law and so it is dismissed. A.E./1222/Lb.S Petition dismissed