1989 PLP 99 (PLC)
LABOUR UNION (C.BA.), GOJRA SAMMUNDRI SUGAR MILLS, FAISALABAD Versus MAZDOOR ITTEHAD UNION, GOJRA SAMMUNDRI SUGAR MILLS and 2 others
| Citation | 1989 PLP 99 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | LABOUR UNION (C.BA.), GOJRA SAMMUNDRI SUGAR MILLS, FAISALABAD Versus MAZDOOR ITTEHAD UNION, GOJRA SAMMUNDRI SUGAR MILLS and 2 others |
| Primary Law | (a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 99 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 99 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 99 (PLC) (LABOUR UNION (C.BA.), GOJRA SAMMUNDRI SUGAR MILLS, FAISALABAD Versus MAZDOOR ITTEHAD UNION, GOJRA SAMMUNDRI SUGAR MILLS and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mahboob Alam Chaudhry for Petitioner.
- Bashir Ahmed for Respondent No. 3.
- Date of hearing: 16th May, 1987.
- 3. The learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4 has passed certain strictures against Mr. Mehboob Alam Chaudhry, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner and he has prayed for the expunction for the same. The appeal could be very well decided by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4, Faisalabad without passing such remarks. The remarks being unnecessary, therefore, are expunged.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 8 & 38 (3-a)--Revision--Registration of Trade Unions--Dispute by rival unions--Decision of Registrar appealed against before Labour Court--Rival trade union alleging that other trade union which was appellant before Labour Court had included their members in its list and applying to Labour Court for being impleaded as party--Labour Court refusing application--Presence of rival trade union, in circumstances, held, was necessary before Labour Court--Appellate Tribunal in revision directing other trade union to implead rival trade union as a party to its appeal before Labour Court.
Ss. 8 & 38 (3-a)--Revision--Labour Court while deciding appeal against decision of Registrar, Trade Unions passing strictures against counsel of party- Strictures having been found unnecessary were expunged by Appellate Tribunal in revision.
Judgment & Decree
Ss. 8 & 38 (3-a)--Revision--Labour Court while deciding appeal against decision of Registrar, Trade Unions passing strictures against counsel of party- Strictures having been found unnecessary were expunged by Appellate Tribunal in revision. Mahboob Alam Chaudhry for Petitioner. Bashir Ahmed for Respondent No.
3. Date of hearing: 16th May, 1987. JUDGMENTS This is a revision reporting that the eider dated 15-4-1987 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4, Faisalabad whereby the application of the petitioner for being impleaded as a party was refused is wrong and improper.
2. Previously the Registrar had brought a revision in this Court which was decided on 14-12-1986 directing the Registrar to hold fresh enquiry in the presence of all the unions and then to consider the question of registration of Mazdoor Ittehad Union. The Registrar has now decided the matter and Mazdoor Ittehad Union has brought an appeal to the learned Labour Court No.4, Faisalabad. Since the direction of this Court was that the question of the registration of respondent No. 2 union should be considered in the presence of all the unions, and all those parties are necessary who were party before the Registrar. Apart from it the case of the petitioner rightly or wrongly is that its members have been included by respondent No. 2 union as its members. This being so the presence of the petitioner before the learned appellate Court is necessary.
3. The learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4 has passed certain strictures against Mr. Mehboob Alam Chaudhry, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner and he has prayed for the expunction for the same. The appeal could be very well decided by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4, Faisalabad without passing such remarks. The remarks being unnecessary, therefore, are expunged.
4. As a result the revision is accepted and the respondent No. 1 who is appellant before the learned lower Court is directed to implead the petitioner as) a party to its appeal. A.E./369/Lb. P Revision accepted.