1988 PLP 922 (SCMR)

SAJJAD AHMAD JAN, J.‑‑On the 28th of February, 1962, the appellant herein, namely, the Organization of Karachi Port Trust Workers‑‑a registered Trade Union‑‑raised some demands on behalf of its members who were employed as Chowkidars and Havildars in the Watch and Ward Department of the Karachi Port Trust (Respondent No.1). The demands related to the terms and conditions of their service and to the re‑instatement of some of them whose services had been terminated by the Port Trust. As the demands were not met and the conciliation proceedings also failed, the disputes were taken to the First Industrial Court of West Pakistan under section 5(5) of the Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1959. The Industrial Court refused to take up the disputes on the view that the Chowkidars and Havildars were not workmen, within the definition of that word in section 2(n) of the aforesaid Ordinance. The appellant challenged this order by a writ petition in the High Court which was dismissed, leading to this appeal by special leave. The learned Judges of the Division Bench in the High Court have held that the finding of the Industrial Court that the members of the Watch and Ward Department of the Port Trust, did not fall within the definition of "workman" amounted to saying that they had no locus standi for the relief sought by them and' that it was thus not a case of refusal on its part to exercise jurisdiction to warrant interference by the High Court. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Industrial Tribunal had completely misdirected itself by adopting a definition of the term "workman" as used in the Ordinance which was wholly against its letter and spirit and that the learned Judges of the Division Bench in not correcting this patent illegality have declined to exercise their constitutional jurisdiction. It is pointed out that the Chowkidars and Havildars do manual work and were therefore included in the definition of "workman" as contained in section 2(n) of the 1959 Ordinance and that the legislative intention is manifested by the fact that they were expressly excluded from that definition by subsequent legislation, viz. section 2(4) of the West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance enacted in the year 1968. The latest Ordinance on the subject, namely, the Industrial Relations Ordinance of 1969 (XXIII‑of 1969) has resolved all doubts on the point. "Workmen" as per definition contained in section 2(xxviii) of this Ordinance, cover all employees of an industrial establishment, whatever the nature of their duties, and include employees who have been discharged in connection with an industrial dispute or whose discharge has led to that dispute. In view of this legal position, Mr. Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, the learned counsel for respondent No.1, has stated at the Bar that the Port Trust will have no objection to the adjudication of the disputes which have been raised before it, by the appellant as existing disputes. This appeal is, therefore, accepted. The case will go back to the Industrial Court with the direction that it will proceed to decide the disputes raised before it, according to their merits, accepting the status of the Chowkidars and Havildars concerned as workmen in the establishment of respondent No.1. There will be no order as to costs. M.I./O‑1/S Appeal accepted.