2001 PLP 38 (PLC)
JAFAKASH MAZDOOR UNION TOWN COMMITTEE, SHARQPUR Versus THE CHAIRMAN, TOWN COMMITTEE, SHARAQPUR
| Citation | 2001 PLP 38 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Mian Ghulam Ahmad, Chairman |
| Parties | JAFAKASH MAZDOOR UNION TOWN COMMITTEE, SHARQPUR Versus THE CHAIRMAN, TOWN COMMITTEE, SHARAQPUR |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 38 (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 2001 PLP 38 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal bench comprising: Mian Ghulam Ahmad, Chairman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 38 (PLC) (JAFAKASH MAZDOOR UNION TOWN COMMITTEE, SHARQPUR Versus THE CHAIRMAN, TOWN COMMITTEE, SHARAQPUR). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Safdar Hussain Sindhu for Appellant.
- Nawab Saeed Ullah Khan for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Ss.2(xiv) (xxviii), 22, 32 & 37(3)‑‑‑Municipal employees‑-‑Status‑‑ Petitioner/ appellant claiming status of Collective Bargaining Agent filed petition under S.32 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 which was dismissed by Labour Court and petitioner had filed appeal against dismissal order‑‑‑Municipal employees having been treated as civil servants could neither function as Collective Bargaining Agent nor form a Trade Union‑‑ Petition was rightly dismissed by the Labour Court. 1997 PLC 608; 1976 SCMR 1399; 1993 PLC 151 ref.
Judgment & Decree
1997 PLC 608; 1976 SCMR 1399; 1993 PLC 151 ref. Safdar Hussain Sindhu for Appellant. Nawab Saeed Ullah Khan for Respondent. The decision announced by the learned Labour Court, Lahore, at Ferozewala, dismissing the petition under section 32, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, filed by Jafakash Mazdoor Union, has been assailed in appeal.
2. General Secretary of the Jafakash Mazdoor Union has claimed the status of CBA, for the union, registered with the Registrar Trade Unions. Charter of demands, followed by a strike notice, was issued by the union to the Town Committee. The Assistant Director Labour Welfare, Feerozewala made unsuccessful efforts at reconciliation and then issued the 'failure certificate' on 29‑11‑1995. The Labour Court was then approached in the matter. The respondent local body described the demands as unlawful and misconceived, also disputing the CBA status for the union.
3. The Town Committee was described as industry, within which set up the union, as was urged, had a locus standi to operate. Relying on 1997 PLC 608, a ruling of this Tribunal as also a Supreme Court ruling reported as 1976 SCMR 1399, the Labour Court has held that the municipal employee are civil servants, not entitled to form a union. In 1995 PLC 151, a Lahore High Court authority, the establishment of a Municipal Corporation was held not to be an industry. 1995 PLC 151 is another authority. Registration of union, municipal employees would thus be in contravention of the relevant provisions of law. As the municipal employees have been treated as civil servants they have no entitlement to form a union. The august apex Court has reiterated in 1996 PLC 577 that municipal employees being civil servants can neither function as CBA nor form a trade union.
4. I cannot but affirm the order of the learned lower Court. The appeal having no force is hereby dismissed, with costs. H.B.T./21/P. (Lab. Trib) Appeal dismissed.