1976 PLP 272 (PLC)

Ss. 22-C-Contempt of Court-Summons issued by National Industrial Relations Commission-Refusal to take delivery-Disregard of order of Commission-Accused refusing to take delivery and not appearing held guilty of disregard of orders of Commission and obstruction of proceedings by non-appearance-Convicted and sentenced to 3 months' simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.

250. M. Afzal Siddiqui for the Complainant. Muhammad Anwar Qazi for Respondent. On 8th January, 1975 a telegram addressed to the Chairman, National Industrial Relations Commission had been received in the camp office of the Commission at Lyalipur from the Swat Silk Mills Employers Association, Swat wherein allegation was made that one Shah Jehan, Advocate (Head of Mazdoor Rabta Committee, Mingora) had incited the workers of various Silk Mills situate in Swat to commence illegal strike. Thereupon, the Deputy Commissioner, Swat was directed to impress upon the workers the desirability to behave properly and to call off the illegal strike immediately failing which drastic action shall be taken against them. Apart from this, I directed the Deputy Commissioner, Swat to apprise Shah Johan Khan to appear before me on 13th January, 1975 at 9-00 a.m. at Islamabad to rebut the allegation. A telegram was also sent to Shah Johan Khan (respondent) directing him to appear before me on the said date.

2. On the basis of the directions issued by me the Deputy Commissioner, Swat prepared summons in triplicate and deputed Syed Badshah, Head Constable, Police Post, Mingora to get the service effected on Shah Jehan Khan. Shah Johan Khan (respondent) however did not appear on the date of hearing i.e., 13th January, 1974.

3. The Deputy Commissioner, Swat reported that he (Shah Jehan Khan) had refused to accept the service of summons. Accordingly notice under section 22-C of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was issued to Shah Jehan Khan (respondent) to show cause as to why he should not be convicted for having flouted the order of the Commission.

4. On 5th February, 1975 the statement of Syed Badshah, Head Con stable was recorded as Court Witness. He categorically deposed that he visited the house of Shah Jehan Khan on 9th January, 1975 for getting service of summons effected but could not contact him. On the following day (10-1-1975) he again visited various places but could not trace his where abouts. Accordingly he (Syed Badshah) informed the Assistant Commissioner, Swat who directed him to affix one copy of the summons at the door of the house of Shah Jehan Khan and the other on the conspicuous place of the main road. He added that eventually on 11th January, 1975 at about evening time, he found Shah Jehan Khan (respondent) present in his house and delivered him a copy of the summons. After taking a copy of the summons, Shah Jehan Khan (respondent) went inside his house and then shortly after wards re-appeared at the door and returned the summons without making any endorsement thereon. He (Shah Jehan Khan) also told him (Syed Badshah) that he may or may not attend the Commission on the appointed date. Thereafter, Syed Badshah made a report on the summons (Exh. C. W. 1/2) and submitted it to the Assistant Commissioner, Swat. During the cross-examination Syed Badshah emphatically stated that Shah Jehan Khan had refused to take delivery of the summons.

5. After the evidence of Syed Badshah was recorded, Shah Jehan Khan (respondent) denied the allegation and expressed his intention to produce defence in rebuttal. He was, accordingly, directed to produce defence on the next date.

6. It is regrettable to note that he has not brought evidence. He has advanced the plea that Mr. Mohammad Afzal Bangash, Advocate who re presented him in this case is busy at Peshawar and as such he has prayed for adjournment. It is pertinent to note that although Mr. Mohammad Afzal Bangash, Advocate was present on 5th February, 1975 when the statement of Syed Badshah was recorded, yet he took no part in the proceedings and cross- examination was conducted by Mr. Mohammad Anwar Qazi; Advocate who is present today. The only inevitable inference, therefore, is that the respondent wants to prolong the case for no rhyme or reason. Since he has not brought evidence, I close the case.

7. As noted above, it is clear from the statement of Syed Budshah, Head Constable that Shah Jehan Khan (respondent) refused to take delivery of the summons and casually remarked that he may or may not appear before the Commission on the appointed date. It is, therefore, clear as broad day light that he disregarded the order of the Commission and obstructed the proceedings by his non-appearance. f may add that I have no reason to dis believe the statement of Syed Badshah, Head Constable which has not been smashed in cross-examination. In these circumstances, I have no hesitation in holding that Shah Johan Khan (respondent) refused to accept the service of summons and thereby disregarded the order of the Commission. As such, he ingredients of section 22-C of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 have been made out.

8. For the foregoing reasons, I convict Shah Jehan Khan (respondent) under section 22-C of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 and sentence him to three months' simple imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 25UF (Rs. two hundred fifty only); in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for one month.