Find a Lawyer

Application No. 117 of 1973, decided on 4th April 1973.

‑‑-S. 47 read with Civil Procedure Code (V of 1.908), O. XXXIX, r. 2 and S. 151‑Industrial dispute pending adjudication before Labour Court‑Termination notices on ground of misconduct served on office‑bearers of Union during such pendency without permission of Labour Court‑‑Union found to have to raise fair question as to existence of legal right ‑ Stay order to effect that services of office- bearers concerned shall not be terminated without permission of Labour Court.

G. T. S. Labour Union (Registered) Lyallpur has moved this application under order XXXIX, rule 2 read with section 151 of the C.P.C. with the prayer that an order restraining the respondent from terminating the services of the General Secretary of the Union and its other office‑bearers till the final adjudication of Industrial Dispute No. 8/73, pending in this Court, be issued and the respondent be directed to maintain the status‑quo.

Arguments heard. In Industrial Dispute No. 8/73, mentioned above one of the demands (No. 16) for adjudication is that the notices issued to the workman under R. T. C. (Undesirable Employees) Ordinance, 1965 on 1‑1‑1973 or after that date may be ordered to be withdrawn. The learned counsel for the respondent argued that the R. T. C. (Removal of Undesirable Employees) Ordinance, 1965, being a special law, overrides the provisions contained in any other law including the provisions of I. R. O., 1969. The learned representative of the petitioner contended that section 47 of the I. R. O. guarantees a right to the office‑bearers of the Union that their services shall not be terminated during the pendency of an industrial dispute, except with the permission of the Labour Court. He contended that the action of the respondent in issuing termination notices on the ground of misconduct to the office‑hearer of the union is illegal and the office‑bearer concerned shall suffer irreparable loss if their services are terminated without a proper charge‑sheet and enquiry. He further argued that the R. T. C. Removal of Undesirable Employees) Ordinance 1965, is a provincials statute and the I. R. O., 1969 being central legislation, the provisions of the later statute shall prevail. I am of the view that he has a fair question to raise as to the existence of the legal right asserted by him and has shown a prima facie fair case in support of the said legal right.

For the above reasons stay order to the effect that the services of the General Secretary and other office‑bearers of the petitioner‑Union shall not be terminated without the permission of the Labour Court, is granted till the final adjudication of Industrial Dispute No: 8/1973.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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