1976 PLP 312 (PLC)

Abdul Majeed for the Complainant. A. Hameed Khan for the Accused Present complaint has been filed for the non-implementation of the award of West Pakistan Industrial Court Karachi passed in Industrial Dispute No. 61/1964 on demand No.

1. The facts are that the complainant was a driver in the Machinery Pool Organization, Equipment Workshop Jamshoro. Complainant and other drivers were discharged from the service on account of remaining absent from the duty. The M. P. O. Wapda Workers Union Jarnshoro filed the referred Industrial Dispute for their reinstatement. On 18-10-1966 complainant was ordered to be reinstated in service under the above award. Th:augt the award was appealed against in High Court of Sind and Baluchistan Karachi in Miscelleneous Appal No. 1 of 1967, but the same was maintained by judg ment dated 14-8-1971. Application of section 50, I. R, O. seeking inter pretation of the above award, was also dismissed by Sind Appellate Tribunal Karachi on 21-9-1972. It is claimed by the complainant that though he has been reinstated in service in compliance to award, still the benefits due under the same have been denied to him. Therefore he has committed offence under section 54/55,

1. R. O. 1969. Accused has taken up plea that since the provisions of Pakistan Essential Services (Maintenance) Act 1952, have been extended to tile employment under M. P. O. WAPDA, this Court is ceased of the jurisdiction to proceed with the case. In support of this plea accused has placed on record two notifications of Central Government dated 31-5-1973 and 30-11-1973 res pectively. Section 6 (1) of the Act reads as under I- The Central Government, may make rules regulating or empowering a specified authority to regulate the wages and other conditions of service of a person or of any class of persons engaged in any employment or class of employment declared under section 3 to be an employment or class of employment to which this Act applies"; Section 7-A of the Act is follows :- The provisions of this Act shall have effect, notwithstanding to the contrary contained in the Trade Union Act, 1926 or the Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1959 or any other law. There is no dispute about the fact that under the rules of section 6 of the Act, the method of regulating the wages and service conditions of the persons covered by section 3 of the Act is very different from that which was prescribed by industrial Disputes Ordinance 1959 and watch ~is given under I. R. O. 1959. As such in the light of the observations made by his lordship of tile High Court of Sind and Baluchistan Karachi in an authority reported under 1973 P L C 94, the effect of section 7-A of the Act is that as soon as A the Act was extended, ttlis Court b,-came divested of its jurisdiction to proceed under

1. R. O. 1959. Since sections 54, 55 are part of I. R. O., 1969, this Court was also ceased of the jurisdiction to proceed wish the case under the same. The arguments that award has beet partly acted by the accused and that under sections 54, 55 no jurisdiction is required it being a criminal offence, would not give jurisdiction to this Court. When Court has no jurisdiction to enforce the award, it has also no jurisdiction to punish any body for the breach of the same. Section 7-A was added to Pakistan Essential Service (Maintenance) Act 1952, by Ordinance No. 5 of 1965. It has been contended that since I R. O. was enacted afterwards i.e. in year 1969 it cannot be covered by section 7-A of the Act. But I am of the opinion that the words or any other law appearing in the section are wide enough to have an overriding effect. No doubt when the first notification dated 21-5-1973 was issued, the present case dated 26th May. 1973 was already pending, but it is the well established position of law that the law of procedure ii always re trospective in operation. Consequently it cannot be argued that the provision of Act 1952 are not to be given effect to because the notification under section 3 of the Act was issued after the present complaint was brought before this Court. It has already been held by Industrial Appellate Tribunal West Pakistan in an authority reported under 1969 P. L. C. 492 that though Machinery Pool Organization of WAPDA, may not be dealing with generation, transmission, distribution and supply of electricity, yet being an employment in or in connection with the Organization (WAPDA) dealing with such functions is covered by the notification and essential service in the terms of section 3 of the Act. In the light of above discussion I find that after the issue of notification this Court is left with no jurisdiction to proceed with the case. Hence the complaint is dismissed and accused is discharged under section 253, Cr. P. C.