1992 PLP 523 (PLC)
Present : Agha Ali Haider, Appellate Tribunal ABDUL REHMAN Versus REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS, KARACHI and 4 others
| Citation | 1992 PLP 523 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Present : Agha Ali Haider, Appellate Tribunal ABDUL REHMAN Versus REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS, KARACHI and 4 others |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP 523 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP 523 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 523 (PLC) (Present : Agha Ali Haider, Appellate Tribunal ABDUL REHMAN Versus REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS, KARACHI and 4 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Date of hearing: 19th January, 1992.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 7
Petitioner Union which was duly registered, had its membership confined to workmen employed in the establishment
Union's application that workmen of other establishment should also be eligible to be its members was finally dismissed by Registrar and Labour Court
Union had agitated the matter in revision before Tribunal-- Both establishments, admittedly being separately incorporated, were distinct juristic persons in law and even their activities and production were different as one establishment, was manufacturing `dry cells' while other was dealing in `Pharmaceutical Products'
Although some Directors of both establishments were common, but there was no bar that Director of one company could not simultaneously be Director of another company
Order of Registrar and Labour Court dismissing application of Union for making employees of the other establishment its members was not open to challenge. Saleem Raza, Representative for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
Date of hearing: 19th January, 1992. Heard the representative of Pakistan Trade Union Federation the applicants.
2. The Union was duly registered earlier and its membership was confined to the workmen employed therein. Now an application has been made that the workmen of ACTO Laboratories would also be eligible to the same.
3. The dispute has a chequered history but shorn of all unnecessary details suffice it to say that the registrar rejected the application and an appeal was preferred before the Labour Court which also came to be dismissed. Hence this Revision application.
4. It has been alleged that these two companies have got a common canteen, the services of the workmen are also interchangeable from one to the other and some of the Directors were also common. .
5. However it is an admitted position that both of these are separately incorporated and, therefore, distinct juristic persons in law. There is no bar that Director of one company cannot simultaneously be the Director of another company. Even their activities and productions are different. Mercantile Industries (Pvt.) Limited manufacturers `dry cells' while the latter is dealing in `pharmaceutical products'. Under subsection 2(a) of section 7 of the I.R.O. `all the workmen in a trade union crust be actually engaged or employed in the Industry with which the trade union is connected'.
6. Under the circumstances the impugned order, is not open to challenge and the Registrar has properly refused the amendment in constitution.
7. The Revision Application is summarily dismissed. H.B.T./2013/Lb. S Revision dismissed.