PLC 2012

2012 PLP 247 (PLC)

SUI SOUTHERN GAS WORKERS UNION Versus SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED

Jurisdiction / Court
National Industrial Relations Commission
Decided Date
Case No.7A(15) of 2011, decided on 6th January, 2012.
Honorable Judges
Ghulam Nabi Deeshak Registrar/Authorised Officer
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2012 PLP 247 (PLC)
Forum / Court National Industrial Relations Commission
Bench Members Ghulam Nabi Deeshak Registrar/Authorised Officer
Parties SUI SOUTHERN GAS WORKERS UNION Versus SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED
Primary Law Industrial Relations Act (IV of 2008)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 247 (PLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Act (IV of 2008) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 247 (PLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the National Industrial Relations Commission bench comprising: Ghulam Nabi Deeshak Registrar/Authorised Officer.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 247 (PLC) (SUI SOUTHERN GAS WORKERS UNION Versus SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Industrial Relations Act (IV of 2008)

Representation

  • M. Tariq Farooqi, President for Petitioner.
  • Faisal Mahmood Ghani for Respondent.
  • 3. On the other side Mr. Faisal Mahmood Ghani learned advocate for the Company has argued that the referendum has been ordered to be held in the establishments of Sui Southern Gas Company, the necessary pre-condition is that the workers should be in possession of an appointment letter of contract of Sui Southern Gas Company and they should be in employment for at least three months as provided in section 19(4)(a) of IRO, 2011. The list of workers submitted by applicant for allowing them to cast their vote in the referendum have no relationship with Sui Southern Gas Company. He further argued that company has outsource certain specific job independent service provider/contractors for the purpose of execution of contract agreement employed their own employees, pay them salaries/wages and exercise control supervision over them to all the contract workers. The instant application has been filed with mala fide intention merely to delay the process of the referendum. He prayed for rejection of this application. I have heard the arguments advanced by applicant and learned counsel for Sui Southern Gas Company. It is submitted that applicant has failed to produce letter of appointments or any evidence which shows that these workers are employed by SSG Company and also has not produced membership forms of these workers which reflects that they are members of his union and paying subscription to it.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 24

Collective Bargaining Agent

Determination

Holding of referendum

Referendum had been ordered to be held in the establishment and necessary pre-condition was that the workers should be in possession of an appointment letter of contract of the employer-company, and they should be in the employment for at least three months

According to the list of employees, workers were working on daily wages/contract in the company since more than 20 years, but they were not regularized and the employer-company was paying the salary to them through contractors

Employees had failed to produce letters of appointment or any evidence showing that those workers were employed by the Employer/company; also could not produce proof of membership, which could reflect that they were members of the union and paying subscription to it

Application filed by employees seeking to cast their votes in the referendum, was rejected, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

GHULAM NABI DEESHAK, REGISTRAR/AUTHORISED OFFICER.

This order will dispose of application filed by President Sui Southern Gas Workers Union for allowing the employees who have been engaged on contract, outsource and third party workers to cast their votes in the forthcoming referendum in the establishment of Sui Southern Gas Company to the Registrar of Trade Union. The learned Registrar vide order dated 24-11-2011 has referred this application to undersigned for hearing and disposal. On receipt of this application the notices were issued to the respondent Sui Southern Gas Company for comments. The General Manager Human Resources contested and filed objections against allowing the contract out of sources and their party workers to cast their votes in the referendum.

2. I have heard the arguments advanced by the applicant and learned Counsel of SSG Company. Mr. M. Tariq Farooqi President of Sui Southern Gas Union has argued that the list of workers submitted by him they are working on Daily Wages/contract in the company since more than 20 years but they are not being regularized and the Company is paying the salary to them through contractors. He further argued that some of contract workers have become member of the trade unions, therefore these members may be allowed to cast their vote in the referendum.

3. On the other side Mr. Faisal Mahmood Ghani learned advocate for the Company has argued that the referendum has been ordered to be held in the establishments of Sui Southern Gas Company, the necessary pre-condition is that the workers should be in possession of an appointment letter of contract of Sui Southern Gas Company and they should be in employment for at least three months as provided in section 19(4)(a) of IRO, 2011. The list of workers submitted by applicant for allowing them to cast their vote in the referendum have no relationship with Sui Southern Gas Company. He further argued that company has outsource certain specific job independent service provider/contractors for the purpose of execution of contract agreement employed their own employees, pay them salaries/wages and exercise control supervision over them to all the contract workers. The instant application has been filed with mala fide intention merely to delay the process of the referendum. He prayed for rejection of this application. I have heard the arguments advanced by applicant and learned counsel for Sui Southern Gas Company. It is submitted that applicant has failed to produce letter of appointments or any evidence which shows that these workers are employed by SSG Company and also has not produced membership forms of these workers which reflects that they are members of his union and paying subscription to it.

4. In the circumstances cited above the application filed by applicant seeking for outsider to cast their votes in the referendum is rejected accordingly. H.B.T./2/NIRC Application rejected.