1971 PLP 202 (PLC)

M.IAMIL ASGHAR (CHAIRMAN). This is a petition under Standing Order 18 of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 by Abdur Rahim, petitioner against M. T. Ansari, Manager, Packages Ltd. respondent praying that his dismissal be set aside and that he be re-instated. The respondent while resisting the petition rose following preliminary objections (1) That the petitioner has no locus stand to file the appli cation as he was neither member of a registered Trade Union nor his services were terminated for Trade Union activities. As his services were terminated for misconduct, the provisions of Standing Order 18 are not attracted. (2) The requirements of Standing Order 18 has not been complied with in respect of 15 days representation of grievance by the petitioner,. (3) That the-instant application under Standing Order 18 is also not maintainable and cannot be proceeded with as the provisions of Standing Order 18 have been repealed by implica tion by section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, which confers locus stand! to file an application regarding any right guaranteed by any law to a workman only a party to an Industrial Dispute, which invariably is a registered Trade Union. (4) The present petition cannot be considered to be a party to an industrial dispute nor any such dispute can be deemed to be in existence, as an individual dispute does not fall within the definition of an Industrial Dispute. The benefits if and accruing under the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, are rights guaranteed by law and fall within the ambit of section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Preliminary objection No. I. - In order to appreciate this objection it wilt be proper to reproduce Standing Order 18, which reads asunder: "Grievance Procedure any individual workman who has a grievance in respect of any matter under this Ordinance and inters to seek redress thereof shall observe the following producer: (a) The workman concerned shall bring his grievance to the notice of his employer, in writing, within fifteen days of the occurrence of the cause of such grievance, and the employer shall" within thirty days of such grievance brought to his notice, inquire into the matter, giving the workman concerned an opportunity of being heard, and communicate his decision, in writing to the said workman; (b) If the employer fails to give a decision within the period specified in clause (a), or if the workman is dissatisfied with such decision, the workman may make a complaint to the Industrial Court having jurisdiction, within thirty days from the date of the decision, or where the employer fail to give a decision, within sixty, days of the workman brand-new the grievance to the notice of the employer, unless the grievance has already been raised or has otherwise been taken cognisance of as an industrial dispute under the provisions of the West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance 1968: Provided that no complaint shall lie against an order of termination of employment of a workman unless the workman concerned is an officer of a registered Trade Union and his employment is alleged to have been terminated for his Trade Union activities or sinless the workman concerned, whether an officer of a registered Trade-Union or not, has been deprived of the benefits accruing, to him under this Ordinance; (c) (d) From the perusal of the above it is clear that an individual workman, who has a grievance in respect of any matter under this, Ordinance can file a petition under Standing Order

18. It is not confined to workmen, who are an officer of a registered Trade Union. The proviso to Standing Order 18 (a) and (b) simply mean that if an officer of a registered Trade Union is dismissed on account of Trade Union activities he could be re-instated. Standing Order 15 (4) makes the dismissal of a workman illegal; if no reasonable opportunity was given to explain the circumstances an alleged against him and as such he is entitled to get the order o dismissal set aside. The proviso to Standing Order 18 cannot take away his right because a workman can seek redress if he has a. grievance in respect of any matter under this Ordinance. In the present case, however, the petitioner is alleged; to have been dismissed for misconduct and as such his right to seek redress cannot be take-h away by the proviso to Standing Order

18. In view of the above this preliminary objection is overruled. Preliminary objection No. 2. -The services of the petitioner were terminated on 5T8-1969 and the employer on 20-8-1969 received his representation bringing his grievance to the notice of his employer by post on 19-8-1969. This fact has been ascertained by the per-sal of the postal receipt acknowledgement due. According to Standing Order 18 an aggrieved workman has to bring his grievance to the notice of his employer in writing within 15 days of the occurrence of the cause of such grievance. In the light of the fact stated above, we find that this representa tion was within time. It is however contradicted by the learned representative of the employer that the representation was not sent by the petitioner himself but it was sent by his counsel. This objection has no force because the counsel had made the representation on behalf of the petitioner and therefore it cannot be said that the is such representation was not made by the petitioner himself. In view of the above this preliminary objection is over ruled. Preliminary objections Nos. 3 and 4-In order to appreciate these preliminary objections, it will be proper to reproduce section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, which reads as under "Application to Labour Court-Any party to an industrial dispute relating to a matter arising out of any right guaranteed or secured to an employer or workman by or under any law for the time being in force or an award or settlement may apply to the Labour Court for adjudication of the dispute." This section presupposes the existence of an industrial dispute, which has been raised in the prescribed manner by a Collective Bargaining Agent as is laid down under section 43 o the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Further it is only a party to an Industrial Dispute which according to the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 can only be the Collective Bargaining Agent, who can make an application relating to a matter arising out of any right guaranteed or secured to an employee or workman by or under any law for the time being in force or an award or settlement, under section 34 for adjudication of the C dispute. In other words an individual workman in the absence o the existence of an Industrial Dispute cannot apply to this Court under this section. Standing Order, 18 of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, on the other hand, gives a right to an individual workman who has a grievance in respect of any matter under this Ordinance to seek redress irrespective of existence or non-existence of an industrial dispute. In view of the above contention that the Standing Order 18 stands repealed by implication on account of section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, has no force. In the result, the aforementioned preliminary objections are overruled.