2005 PLP 24 (PLC)
PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS LABOUR UNION Versus M/s. PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS (PVT.) LTD and others
| Citation | 2005 PLP 24 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Shabbir Ahmad and Khilji Arif Hussain, JJ |
| Parties | PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS LABOUR UNION Versus M/s. PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS (PVT.) LTD and others |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 24 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 24 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Shabbir Ahmad and Khilji Arif Hussain, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 24 (PLC) (PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS LABOUR UNION Versus M/s. PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS (PVT.) LTD and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for Petitioner.
- Sher Afghan for Respondents.
Judgment & Decree
Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for Petitioner. Sher Afghan for Respondents. Date of hearing; 30th March, 2004. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 25-11-1996 passed by the Registrar of Trade Unions in exercise of powers under Sub-section (3) of section 10 of the late Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 The order reads as follows:-- "In exercise of the powers conferred on me under Subsection (3) of section 10 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, and after necessary enquiry 1, Ayaz Ahmed K. Shaikh, Registrar of Trade Unions, Sindh, Karachi, do hereby cancel the registration of Precision Rubber Products Workers Union, Korangi, Karachi bearing Registration No.4834 as the same has ceased to exist. " The Petitioner filed appeal before the Labour Court, on being unsuccessful he filed further appeal before the Labour Appellate Tribunal. The learned Chairman of Labour Appellate Tribunal, by order dated 31-8-1999 maintained the order. Hence the present Petition. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The Registrar in terms of Subsection (3) has powers to cancel the registration after holding such enquiry as he deems fit if he find that such Trade Union is dissolved by itself or has ceased to exist. The petitioner's case is that the Petitioner was condemned unheard as no show-cause notice was issued before the impugned order. Learned counsel for the Respondent has vehemently maintained that the pleas taken against the Petitioner through counter affidavit have not been controverted which raises the disputed question of facts, which cannot be adjudicated. Whether Union is dissolved itself or the same still exists is a question of fact and unless the petitioners were heard, such finding not be recorded. It is now well-settled that the principle enunciated in maxim "audi alteram partem" is to be read in every Statute more particularly when the right is affected by the impugned order. The right of hearing was not provided to the Petitioner. A feeble attempt was made by the respondent's counsel that the petitioner has no right to appeal. The reply to such contention lay in section 11 of the Ordinance. Consequently, we allow the Petition and struck down the order however, the Registrar Trade Union, would be at liberty to initiate proceedings after due notice to the Petitioner and opportunity of hearing before an adverse order is passed. With the above observations, the Petition is allowed, with no order as to costs. H.B.T./P-18/K Petition allowed.