Find a Lawyer

Petition No. FD‑202 of 1981/Pb., decided on 20th February, 1983.

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑---

--‑S. 50‑Settlement‑Interpretation of‑Workers union applying to Government for appointment of auditors to audit accounts of employer Mills and notification regarding appointment of Auditors issued‑Employer challenging such notification by way of application under S. 34 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 before Labour Court and on rejection of application filing appeal before Labour Appellate Tribunal ‑ During pendency of such appeal Settle ment arrived at containing a clause that "Union would withdraw all cases pending in Courts"‑Such clause, held, could not i.e. interpreted to mean that it would apply also to application of Union for appoint ment of auditors which had since been disposed of by Government and appointment of auditors notified.

Naeem Bokhari and Muhammad Saleem Baig for Petitioner.

Muhammad Akram for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 13th February, 1983.

This is an application under section 50 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 for the interpretation of a clause of settlement dated 1st March, 1980. An application was given by the respondent union to the Government for the appointment of auditors to audit the accounts of the petitioner Mills for the year 1976‑77. The Government issued notification appointing one of the auditors suggested by the union to audit the accounts of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the order under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 but failed. The order spas challenged in appeal.

During the pendency of appeal, a settlement was arrived at for the inter pretation of which the present petition has been moved The clause sought to be interpreted is to the effect that the union would withdraw all the cases pending in Courts pending adjudication of audit of the accounts of the petitioner. The union actually moved an application to the Government for the withdrawal of the petition for the appointment of auditor but the same was rejected on the ground that by means of a notification a chartered accountant had already been appointed as auditor to audit the accounts The words all cases pending adjudication in Courts' are significant. Since the Government had already issued notification appointing an auditor, it A cannot be said that the petition made by the union under section 23‑B o the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was pending adjudication. It had rather been before that disposed of. The relevant clause of the settlement, therefore, was not applicable. It is interpreted to mean that the cases pending and not already adjudicated upon can be withdrawn. The petition made under section 50 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 i answered accordingly.

A.E. Appeal 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.