1981 PLP 656 (PLC(CS))

Mahmood A. Ghani for Appellants. Ali Amjad and Fasahat Hussain Rizvi for Respondents. Date of hearing : 24th March, 1981. These 56 appeals by the appellant‑Corporation, which bousts of the honorific appellation of the Textile Corporation of Pakistan" are all directed against the decision of the learned VIth Labour Court, given on 30th November 19180, by which it set aside the orders of retrenchment of the 56 respondents, and directed their re‑instatement with full back benefits. The retrenchment orders were purported to have been made on the ground that the appellant‑Corporation had been suffering huge losses since 30th September, 1974. According to the Management, the Corporation had suffered accumulated losses of Rs. 2,29,25,000 during the period from 30th September, 1974 upto 30th September, 1978. The learned Labour Court has not doubted the quantum of losses suffered by the appellant‑Corporation but has taken the view that the reasons for the losses were not tile inefficient working of workmen but some other causes as stated in the Assessment Order of the Income‑tax authorities. Moreover, the basis for its decision was that the appellant‑Corporation had taken over the Management of the Corporation from 18th November, 1978, with the full knowledge of the accumulated losses and as it had run the mills for only. a few months when the orders of retrenchment in respect of the respondent workmen were issued, there was no tangible evidence on record to show that after the take over the appellant‑Corpo ration had incurred losses.

2. Since the present Management of the appellant‑Corporation has by now been running the Mills for over 2 years, and for this period or at least part of it, audited account must be available, it would be proper to examine those accounts to determine whether since its take‑over by the present Management, the appellant‑Corporation has incurred losses or has earned profits. Another point which merits consideration is under what terms and conditions .the mills of the appellant‑Corporation were leased out on or about 20th August 1979, to its sister concern, Messrs Shaharyar Textile Mills Ltd., Kotri. According to the reply statement of the appellant‑Corporation filed before the learned Labour Court a photostat copy of the lease agreement was appended therewith: Specific reference to this lease agreement has also been made in the affidavit filed by the General Manager of the appellant‑Corporation before the learned Labour Court. However, no copy, of this agreement is on the record of the learned Labour Court which has been received by this Tribunal. Search should, therefore, be made by the office of the learned Labour Court for this document, and if available, it should be added to the record of the case.

3. In view of the above position, by consent of the learned Repre sentative and the counsel for the parties, I would remand the case to the learned Labour Court with the direction to give an opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence, firstly, in regard to the audited accounts of the appellant‑Corporation after its take over by the present Management in November, 1978, and secondly, as to the terms and conditions on which the Mills had been leased out to the sister concern, including whether in fact the lessor and the lessee are substantially the same con cern under different names. The learned Labour Court will, in the light of the evidence produced by the parties on the above issues, give a fresh finding on the issue not only of whether the appellant corporation had been ‑incurring losses even after its take over by the present management, but further whether the re‑instatement orders were justified or unjustified. In case it considers that the termination orders were justified, it may also reconsider the question whether the respondents were entitled to be re‑employed, and if so, from what date. The learned Labour Court is directed to give top priority to this case and ensure its ‑disposal within 2 months from the date of this order. As the matter affects a large number of workers and further the appellant‑Corporation complains that it is incurring further losses, which it is not in a position to able to bear, the Labour Court must ensure that this time limit is strictly.

4. Mr. Mahmood A. Ghani undertakes on behalf of the appellant- Corporation to continue to employ the 56 respondents until fresh decision in this behalf is given by the learned Labour Court.