1982 PLP 776 (PLC(CS))

S. 25-A-Grievance petition before Labour Court-Essential re quirement: Grievance notice to employer-Grievance petition against order of transfer already before Labour Court Petitioner meanwhile further aggrieved of being deprived of promotion and seeking amendment of grievance petition-Request for amendment allowed by Labour Court-No grievance notice regarding subsequent grievance given to employer-Order of Labour Court, in circumstances, set aside by Appellate Tribunal in exercise of suo motu revision powers-Revision-Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 38 (3-a). Sheikh Fazal Din for Applicant. Shabbir Ahmed Awan for Respondent. Date of hearing: 26th October 1981. Respondent Altaf Hussain, who is said to have joined the Railway department in the year 1962 and was subsequently promoted first as Assistant Wireman and then as Wireman, was transferred to work under E. F. O., Sukkur. He challenged the transfer orders through a grievance petition which is pending before the learned VIIth Labour Court. It appears that during the pendency of the said application, one Muhammad Ibrahim a Wireman under DEALC (Signal) Sukkur, was promoted as Mistri, to which promotion, according to respondent Altaf Hussain, he was entitled, but on account of his illegal transfer he has been unlawfully, deprived. He accordingly sought an amendment of his original grievance petition challenged his transfer by adding the more potent grievance of deprivation of lawful promotion. This request for amendment of the grievance petition has been allowed by the learned Labour Court and it appears that the proceedings in the Labour Court now are in respect of 2 grievances, firstly the grievance regarding the transfer, and secondly the grievance regarding deprivation of promotion. Since these are 2 separate grievance petitions in respect of each of which the procedure laid down in section 25-A, I.R.O., is required to be followed, the record and pro ceedings of the grievance petition filed by respondent Altaf Hussain have been sent for from the learned VIIth Labour Court in order to examined the legality, propriety and correctness of the order allowing the amend ment of the grievance petition, as prayed for by respondent Altaf Hussain. 2. I have heard Mr. Shabbir Ahmed Awan, learned counsel for the Railways and Mr. Sheikh Fazal Din, Advocate, who appeared for the respondent Altaf Hussain. It was not disputed by Mr. Sheikh Fazal Din that the deprivation of promotion of respondent Altaf Hussain is a fresh grievance, but he argued that it was in consequence of and con nected with the orders of his transfer. Even, if the contention of Mr. Sheikh Fazal Din be correct, that does not entitle the respondent, Altaf Hussain, to an amendment of his original grievance petition, which was confined solely to the grievance of transfer. The essential require ment for preferring a grievance petition in respect of any grievance is that the grievance must first be brought to the notice of the employer within the prescribed period, so that the employer may have an opportunity of reviewing his orders and redressing the grievance. This essential requirement had admittedly not been fulfilled in the instant case so far as the grievance in regard to the deprivation of promotion is concerned. In fact the second grievance arose much after the grievance petition had been filed. The amendment to the grievance petition thus clearly is against the provisions of section 25-A, I. R. O. I would accordingly, in the exercise of the suo motu powers of revision of this Tribunal, set aside the orders of the learned Labour Court, permitting respondent Altaf Hussain to amend his grievance petition. Needless to add that it will be open to Altaf Hussain, after following the procedure prescribed in section 25-A, I. R. O., to file a fresh grievance petition for the fresh cause of action, i -so desired by him. Revision allowed.