Find a Lawyer

Application No. 13 of 1970, decided on 10th June 1972.

S. 8--Trade Union -Registration-Registrar refusing to register Trade Union fn view of an objection laid with him -Such objection not communi cated to applicant-Union within 15 days of receipt of application for registration-Registrar not even verifying genuineness of letter containing objection and such objection In fact received by Registrar three months after applicant-Union's application for registration ---Registrar directed to register applicant Trade Union, in circum stances.

Muhammad Umar Qureshi for Applicant.

Nemo for Respondent.

This is an appeal under section 8(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, against the respondent, the Registrar of Trade Unions.

The case of the appellants is that they had formed the Trade Union of the employees of the Faqir Spinning Mills, Gambat, and had submitted an application for its registration to the respondent on 24th February 1970. No objection, however, was raised by the respondent within 15 days of the receipt of the appli cation, as required by subsection (1) of section 8 of the I.R.O. 1969. In fact, the respondent had caused the inspection of the record and books of the appellant-Union and verification of the application for registration. But, on 4th July 1970, the respondent intimated the appellants that their Union could not be registered in pur suance of their application and asked them to apply afresh for registration if they so desired. The appellants contend that this action of the respondent was illegal and in contravention, of the provisions of the I.R.O., 1969. According to them, the registra tion was refused to them because the Management of the Faqir Spinning Mills had formed a Pocket Union of their supporters. Hen they have filed this appeal.

The respondent, in his reply statement, states that on 22^nd May 1970 he received intimation from the President and General 'Secretary of Faqir Spinning Mills' Labour Union to the effect that most of the office-bearers of the Union had left the employ ment of the Mills and ha joined ether registered Trade Unions of that Mill, and hence their application for registration may be treated as cancelled. He had, however, asked the General Secretary of the appellant-Union to apply afresh for the registration if he so desired, by his letter dated 4th July 1970.

After filing the Reply Statement, the respondent remained absent and none appeared on his behalf on the dates when the appeal was fixed for heating of the arguments. Mr. Umar Qureshi appeared for the appellants and argued the matter.

The action of the Registrar appears clearly wrong and in contravention of the provisions of subsection (1) of section 8 of the I.R.O. 1969, in view of the fact that the- objections were not communicated to the appellants- within 1-5 days of that date of the receipt of their application for registration. In fact even for his reply statement, it appears that the letter alleged to have been written by the President and General Secretary, asking for the cancellation of the application for registration, was received by him 3 months after the application of the appellants' Union for registration. Besides this, the respondent does not state if he verified whether the letter dated 22nd May 1970 was genuine to it was inspired by the rival Union which, according to the appellants, was the Pocket Union formed by the Management,

Therefore, for the reasons stated above the appeal is allowed; and the respondent is directed to register the appellant Trade Union and issue the Certificate of Registration.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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