1987 PLP 234 (PLC)

Farooq Zaman Qureshi for Petitioner. Muhammad Ashraf for Ch. Muhammad Wasi Zafar for Respondent No.

1. Date of hearing: 11th October, 1986. : In Writ Petition No.3183 of 1984 brought by Mujahid Workers Union against the Mazdoor Union respondent No.l herein, by order dated 2‑12‑1985, it was maintained that, The Registrar, Trade Unions, Sargodha, is directed to hold an inquiry as to whether respondent No.l Trade Union fulfils the requirement of law for registration and has the requisite membership of not less than 1/5th of the total number of workers employed in Rehmania Textile Mills, Jhang Road, Faisalabad. The inquiry shall be concluded within one month after notice to the parties concerned. In pursuance of this order the Registrar Trade Unions, Sargodha, held an inquiry and sent his report dated 25‑2‑1986 to the Registrar Trade Unions, Faisalabad. There is no dispute that the total strength of the workmen employed in the Mill, on 25‑1‑1984, was

578. Under section 7(2)(b) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, in order to qualify for registration, the respondent Union must show that its membership was not less than 1/5th of the total number of the workmen employed in the Mill. According to the report aforesaid the respondent claimed that the strength of its members was

153. However, the Inquiry Officer found that out of these, 8 persons were not on the rolls of the mills and the names of three workmen were entered in the list twice. Thus, he came to the conclusion that after deduction of eleven, according to the respondent's own list, the strength of its members was 142 only. It was also discovered that out of 142 workmen said to have been affiliated with the respondent, only 56 were in the service of the Mill. The probe made by the Inquiry Officer, further revealed that from amongst these 56 workmen, 39 showed allegiance to the petitioner Union; three remained neutral and only 14 sided with the respondent. Despite all this, the Inquiry Officer held: ‑ Although the odds at present goes against Mazdoor Union as for statements of‑56 workers is concerned. But in my opinion this does not matter as with the span of time there could be change in particular or in general. So, I hold that at the time of application for registration of union the total strength of the mills workers was 578 and the bona fide membership of 142 submitted by the Mazdoor Union at that time fulfilled the requirement of subsection (2)(b) of section 7 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. In the impugned order, the Registrar Trade Unions, Sargodha has expressed the view that he could not go behind the said report and was obliged to pass an order for registration of the respondent Union. It is under these circumstances that the registration of the respondent Union allowed by the Registrar ,Trade Unions, Faisalabad, under his order dated 18‑3‑1986, has been called in question in this writ petition.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. There can be hardly any doubt that under section 7(2)(b) to earn registration the respondent must show that its membership is not less than 1/5th of the total number of the workmen employed in Rehmania Textile Mills, Faisalabad. The report dated 25‑2‑1986 amply demonstrates that the respondent has failed to satisfy this requirement of law. The inference drawn by the Inquiry Officer is wholly untenable and upon the facts disclosed by him in his report, he was wrong in maintaining that respondent enjoyed the support of 142 workmen. There was no valid reason for such a conclusion.

3. The report has to be read as a whole. But the Registrar Trade Unions Sargodha despite his feelings that the respondent did not qualify for registration proceeded to act upon the last paragraph of the report and allowed the registration in dispute. Before me the learned counsel for the respondent, who is accompanied by the President of the Union, willy‑nilly had to agree that the strength of the workmen affiliated with Mazdoor Union is far below 1/5th of the total strength of the workmen of the Mill. In these circumstances the registration granted to the respondent cannot be sustained.

4. For the foregoing reasons this writ petition is accepted and the impugned order declared to have been passed without lawful authority and of no legal effect. Consequently, the registration of the respondent. Union stands cancelled. The parties are left to bear their own costs. A.A./486/Lb Petition accepted.