1994 PLP 407 (PLC)

‑‑‑‑Ss. 12 & 13‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Dissolution of Trade Union‑‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑‑Exercise of‑‑‑Petitioner who was President of Trade Union had challenged order passed by Registrar, Trade Unions whereby decision to dissolve the Union was held to be in violation of Constitution and Rules of the Union‑‑‑Registrar in compliance with directions of Labour Court recorded evidence of office‑bearers of Union and decided in the light of evidence on record that decision of general body to dissolve Union was in violation of Constitution and Rules of Union as issuance of agenda and proceedings for dissolution of Union was bogus‑‑‑Question raised in Constitutional petition was a question of fact which needed elaborate enquiry d that course of action could not be adopted in Constitutional jurisdiction by High Court ‑‑‑ Constitutional petition was dismissed not being maintainable. Ch. M. Khalid Farooq for Petitioner. This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan was been filed by one Muhammad Anwar to call in question the order dated 7‑10‑1992 passed by the Registrar of Trade Unions, Faisalabad, whereby, the decision to dissolve Punjab Road Transport Corporation Mazdoor Ittehad Union, was held to be in violation of the constitution and rules of the union. The petitioner who is a President of the said union had conveyed the decision of the general body dissolving the union to the Registrar, Trade Unions, Faisalabad respondent, who thought it fit to hold a factual enquiry and thus a committee was constituted which recorded the statements o the members of the union and submitted its report on 17th of April, 1990 but on the next day, no final order was passed because Member, National Industrial Relations Commission ordered to maintain status quo. The matter thus remained pending with the Registrar when in the meanwhile, two groups of the labour fought with each other in which two workers were murdered, as a result whereof a number of the members and the office‑bearers of the union were arrested.

2. Prolonged litigation took place between the conflicting groups of the unions in different Courts and ultimately, Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal ordered that the question of dissolution should be decided after hearing thirteen office‑bearers and the case was then sent to the Punjab Labour Court. The said Court vide order dated 5‑5‑1992 directed the Registrar, Trade Unions/respondent, to dispose of the question of dissolution, after hearing 13 persons enumerated in the petition.

3. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the General Secretary of the Union was asked to produce 13 office‑bearers before the respondent. In compliance of the said order, 12 persons were produced and their statements were recorded and the 13th person could not be produced because he was in jail. After recording the statements of 12 office‑bearers, the respondent/Registrar, Trade Unions observed that the meeting dated 8th of March, 1990 in which the decision to dissolve the union took place, its agenda was issued by the Vice‑President who subsequently disowned the same and also stated that he had not presided over the meeting. The respondent also observed that in the absence of the General Secretary, the Joint Secretary was empowered under the Constitution of the Unions to call the. General Body meeting and, therefore, the issuance of agenda was illegal when the 12 office- bearers also deposed that the proceedings for dissolution of the unions were bogus.

4. All these conclusions arrived at by the respondent/Registrar of the Trade Unions was assailed before this Court and the learned counsel has also been heard at length.

5. After careful consideration of all the facts, this Court is of the view that the question raised in this petition is a question of fact which needs elaborate enquiry and the said course of action cannot be adopted in proceedings under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan and, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner may if so advised choose remedy before some other forum. H.B.T./M‑1463/L Petition dismissed.