Find a Lawyer

Miscellaneous Application No, 92 of 1972.

, S. 22, read with Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX, rr. 1 & 2 Injunction, temporary ‑Collective Bargaining Agent, determination of‑Proper venue for raising objections in matter‑Registrar, Trade. Unions‑Registrar, Trade Unions having considered question suggest ed previously by Labour Court, no ground, held, existed to restrain Registrar from performing functions exclusively falling within his jurisdiction.

Wasi Ahmad for Applicant.

Mahmood A. Ghana for Respondent No. 1.

All Amjad for Respondent No. 2.

Mehr Illahi for Respondent No. 3.

In this application, under Order XXXIX, rules 1 and 2, C. P. C., the applicant‑Union seeks ad inter6n injunction restraining the respondent No. 3, Registrar of Trade Unions, from holding the secret ballot for the purpose of determining the Collective Bargaining Agent in any manner except in accordance with the instructions of this Court contained in the order, dated 18th March 1972.

The order, dated 18th March 1972, was passed on a similar application moved to the applicant‑Union, seeking ad interim injunction restraining the Registrar of Trade Unions from deter mining the Collective Bargaining Agent in pursuance of the appli cation made by respondent No. 2, Union. That application was dismissed on the ground that the Registrar of Trade Unions was the sole authority to determine the Collective Bargaining Agent under the provisions of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. While rejecting the application, it was observed as follows:-

"However, there appears some force in the contention of the applicant‑Union that it Is the registered Trade Union of not only the employees of the Head office of respondent No. 1 Industries but of the Head Office of other Tobacco Companies as well. Therefore, the Registrar of Trade I Unions, while determining the Collective Bargaining Agent, will consider this question as well as the question whether the secret ballot should be confined only to the employees of the Head Office."

The case of the applicant‑Union, and respondent No. 1 viz., Premier Tobacco Industries Ltd., is that the Registrar is proceeding to hold the secret ballot for determining the Collective Bargaining Agent in violation of the above directions of the 'Court, and has issued a letter, dated' 20th May 1972, asking the applicant‑Union to submit the, list of the members of their Union for that purpose.

The case of the respondent No. 2, Union, arid respondent No. 3, is that the question has been considered by the letter as directed in the order of the Court. They have relied upon Clauses 2 and 3 of .the Registered Constitution of the applicant Union, which provide that the latter Union was only of the employees of Premier Tobacco Industries Ltd.

The letter of the Registrar of the Trade Unions, dated 20th May 1972, shows that he has considered the question whether the Referendum should be confined only to the employees of the Head Office or the employees of the Factory as well, In view of the constitution of the applicant Union, and has thereafter issued the letter asking them ' to submit the list of the Members. Consequently, I find no ground, for the present to restrain the Registrar from performing the functions, which exclusively fall within his jurisdiction, as haw already been held in order, dated 18th May 1972. The proper‑venue for raising the' objections if any in connection with the determination of the Collective Bargaining Agent, by the Union concerned, is the Registrar, Trade Unions and not this Court. The application is, therefore, dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.