Find a Lawyer

Miscellaneous Application No. 85 of 1972, decided on 27th June 1972.

, S. 15 read with Civil Procedure Lode (V of 1908), A. XXXIX, rr. I do 2 Transfers of employees‑‑Can be made on exigencies of business ‑Transfer of almost all office bearers of Employees' Union made after formation and registration of Union and while determination of Collective Bargaining Agent pending, hold, made to defeat purpose of referendum‑Prima facie case, held, made out for issue of ad interim injunction.

M. H. Siddiqi for Applicant.

Drat Puri for Respondents.

In this application under Order XXXIX, rules 1 and 2, C. P. C.; the applicant‑seeks ad interim injunction restraining the respondents from posting him outside Karachi till the decision of the application under section 34 of the 1. R. O., 1969.

The applicant's case is that he is the President of the Employees' Union of the respondent‑Industries. There is another Union in the same Industries namely "Telephone Industries Staff Union" which, according to the applicant, is the Pocket Union of the respondent‑Management and, as such, had lost the confidence o1 the workers. Consequently, they formed the "Employees' Union", arid applied to the Registrar for holding the referendum to ascertain the Collective Bargaining Agent. The Registrar of Trade Unions has asked for the required information from the "Was and the date for the Referendum is expected to be fixed to the near future. The respondents, however, started harassing and victimizing the office‑bearers of the Employees' Union as soon as it was formed and registered. They have transferred the vice‑President, General Secretary, Cashier and 2 member of Executive Body, rind have now Issued orders of the transfer of the applicant to Lahore from Karachi. The General Secretary' ha< moved this Court for the ad interim injunction restraining hi transfer, and the same was granted to him by order dated 7th April 1972.

The respondents contend that the transfer of an employee does not amount to infringement of any right guaranteed secured to the applicant. They have also disputed the claim o Employees' Union to seek referendum for the purpose of Collective Bargaining Agent, as there are several other Unions is their industries. According to them, the transfer of the applicant has been mace due to exigencies of the service and business.

Now, it is true that the transfer is a normal incidence of the terms anti conditions of an employee and may be made on account of exigencies of business. But; in the present case, it is significant that the transfers of almost all the office‑bearers of the Employees Union have been made after the formation and registra tion of the Union. Therefore, the proposed transfer of the applicant to Lahore at this stage, when the referendum for the declaration of the Collective Bargaining Agent is to be held, appears to have been made with a view to defeat the purpose of the referendum. Consequently, I find that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for the ad interim injunction which he seeks. The act interim injunction as prayed is granted till the decision of the application under section 34 of the I.R.O 1969.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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