Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Application No. 18 of 1970, decided on 18th May 1970.
---S. 45‑Strike Prohibition order‑--Employer praying for order of prohibiting strike‑‑One of the two workers' Unions contesting application, denying existence of strike and stating it as lock‑out by employer--- Circumstances, held; sufficient for an order for prohibition of strike or lock'‑out‑‑Prohibition order, in circumstances held, binding only ‑on employer and Union contesting application.
Mahmood A. Ghani for Applicant.
Nemo for Respondent.
‑The perusal of the office copy of the Notice issued in this case, to the respondent Union, shows that the notice was' received any the General Secretary of the respondent‑Union. But none from the side of the respondent---Union is in attendance: We have heard Mr Mahmood A, Ghani the learned Representative of the applicant Concern. He says that there are two Unions of workmen of the applicant Concern. One is the respondent‑Union (i.e.) Feroze Sultan Industries Employees Union which is an old Union any which was previously the only recognized Union. The other one is Feroze Sultan Industries Workers' Union, which according to Mr. Mahmood A. Ghani achieved prominence only three to five months ago. So far, the representative character as a Collective Bargaining Agent of either of the two Unions has not been determined through referendum under section 22 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969.
Mr. Mahmood A. Ghana says that the workers of the appli cant‑Mill are on strike but adds that the stand of the represen tatives of the workers before the Labour Department is and had been that they have been locked out by the Management. In these proceedings as also in the main case tinder section 34 of the I. R. O., 1969. Feroze Sultan Industries Employees' Union alone has been impleaded as respondent. .
It has now been prayed that Feroze Sultan Industries Workers' Union may also be added as a respondent. 'At the same time it is insisted by Mr. Mahmood A. Ghani that decision on this application under section 45 of the I.R.O. may be given against the Feroze Sultan Industries Employees' Union which although served with the notice has failed to contest this application. The question as to whether it is a strike or a lock‑out of as to whether it is legend or illegal will be determined later and in due course, yet the circumstances of the case will justify issuance of a propitiatory order in this case. It is, therefore, ordered that the strike if any, be called off or the lock‑out if any, should be discontinued forthwith. This order will be binding .on the one hand on the respondent (i.e.) Feroze Sultan Industries Employees Union and on the other on the Employer. The rival Union namely Feroze Sultan Industries Workers' Union has not so far been added as a party nor it is before us as a party in these proceedings, therefore, that Union cannot be bound down by this order.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer