Find a Lawyer

Application No. KAR‑382 of 1980, heard on 7th August, 1980.

‑‑ S. 38‑Transfer of cases‑Grounds‑‑Contention that Labour Court disallowed some questions put. by counsel to a witness in cross‑examination‑Nature of questions not indicated Disallowing questions‑Within power of Court itself and not a sufficient ground for transfer of case‑Labour Courts, however, advised to show due consideration to counsel or parties particularly senior counsel and nothing should be done or expressed suggesting remotely in minds of counsel or parties that Court was prejudiced‑Procedure and powers of Labour Court‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 36.

A. R. Kazi for Applicant.

Khalid Javed for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 7th August, 1980.

This is an application praying for the transfer of the Application No, 20/80, under section 25‑A, I. R. O., presently pending adjudica tion before the learned IVth Labour Court on the grounds, firstly, that the learned Labour Court had disallowed certain questions which the learned counsel for the applicant was desirous of putting to a witness in cross‑examination, and secondly, the learned Labour Court, while hearing the arguments of the learned counsel of the applicants had made the unwarranted observation that it would only accept the rulings of the High Court and not of this Tribunal and from these 2 circumstances, the applicants apprehend that it may not get a fair deal and justice from the learned Labour Court. The remarks of the learned Presiding Officer of the IVth Labour Court have been called for. He has denied both these allegations. According to him no questions put by the learned counsel of the applicants were disallowed. He has further stated that there was no reason for him to state that he would not accept the rulings of this Tribunal since he has in his, decisions, repeatedly relied upon them. In fairness to the learned Presiding Officer, I must say that in a number of his decisions which have come to my notice, he has referred to and relied upon the decisions of this Tribunal.

2. The respondent also had filed objection to the transfer application denying the above allegations. Now as regards the first ground on which the transfer of the case is sought, even if it be conceded that the learned Labour Court disallowed certain questions, this itself would not b sufficient ground for the transfer of proceedings, since it is within the power of the learned Labour Court to disallow questions which he thinks inadmissible and irrelevant. Since the nature of the questions which are said to have been disallowed is not known, it is not, possible to say that the disallowing of the said question was a wrong exercise of the discretion vested in the Court. So far as the second allegation is concerned, since this Tribunal is the appellate authority in respect of all the Labour Courts in the Province, it is incumbent upon them to follow and accept its decisions. As already pointed out, in a number of decisions of the learned Labour Court which have come to my notice he has relied upon the decisions of this Tribunal.

3. I am, therefore, of the view that no valid ground for transfer of the case has been made out. However, I would like to emphasise that the Courts are required to show due consideration to the counsel of the parties, specially senior counsel and nothing should be done or expressed which could remotely suggest in the minds of the parties or their counsel that the Court is prejudiced.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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