1991 PLP 406 (PLC)
Present: Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal SINDH SEED CORPORATION EMPLOYEES' UNION Versus AIJAZ AHMAD K. SHEIKH and another
| Citation | 1991 PLP 406 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal SINDH SEED CORPORATION EMPLOYEES' UNION |
| Parties | Present: Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal SINDH SEED CORPORATION EMPLOYEES' UNION Versus AIJAZ AHMAD K. SHEIKH and another |
| Primary Law | Industrial dispute‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 406 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial dispute‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 406 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal SINDH SEED CORPORATION EMPLOYEES' UNION.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 406 (PLC) (Present: Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal SINDH SEED CORPORATION EMPLOYEES' UNION Versus AIJAZ AHMAD K. SHEIKH and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Fasahat Hussain Zaidi for Appellant.
- Bashir Awan for Respondent No.2.
- Date of hearing: 13th January, 1990.
- 2. I have heard Syed Fashat Hussain Zaidi, learned Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Bashir Awan, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and have also gone through the record and proceedings of the case.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑ Trade Union‑‑‑Registration of Appellant Trade Union was cancelled by Labour Court on application of respondent Trade Union on ground that some of office‑bearers of Union had been declared to be employers by Sindh Government under a certain Notification which was declared by High Court to be ultra vines and arbitrary and without authority‑‑‑Held since ground on which registration was cancelled no more existed, order of Labour Court was not maintainable which was set aside.
Judgment & Decree
Syed Fasahat Hussain Zaidi for Appellant. Bashir Awan for Respondent No.2. Date of hearing: 13th January, 1990. This is an appeal against the order of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No. VI at Hyderabad, dated 27‑2‑1989, whereby the registration of the appellant union was cancelled on the application of the Registrar of Trade Unions, who is respondent No.l, on the ground that some of the office‑bearers of the union had been declared to be employers by the Sindh Government under Notification No. 21(41) S.O. (DEV)/87, dated 18‑9‑1988.
2. I have heard Syed Fashat Hussain Zaidi, learned Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Bashir Awan, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and have also gone through the record and proceedings of the case.
3. Admittedly the Notification referred to above was challenged by the appellant before the Hon'ble Sindh High Court. The Sindh High Court, by its order, dated 16‑5‑1989 has declared this Notification to be ultra vires and arbitrary and passed without lawful authority. In view of this decision of the Hon'ble High Court the ground on which registration was cancelled, no more exists and therefore order of the Labour Court is not maintainable and is also liable to be set aside.
4. Mr. Bashir Awan further submitted that in the application for cancellation of registration the Registrar had further alleged the violation of certain rules by the appellant but no finding was given by the Labour Court. Be that as it may, no cross‑objection was filed in this Tribunal by the respondents with regard to the ‑alleged omission of the learned Presiding Officer to give finding on such allegation. The presumption would be that the parties did not press this point before the learned Labour Court. The non‑filing of the cross‑objection would obviously show that this point was not pressed even before this Tribunal.
5. As the Notification declaring certain office‑bearers as employers has been held to be unlawful by the Hon'ble Sindh High Court, there would be no 113 more any ground for cancellation of the registration of the union. As such the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The Respondent No.l is directed to restore the registration of the appellant Employees' Union. M.Y.H./1628/Lb.S???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal allowed.