Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Appeal No. KAR‑59 of 1984, heard on 24th October, 1985.
‑‑‑S. 34‑‑Trade Union espousing cause of workers against apprehended breach of service conditions‑‑Labour Court issuing injunction order‑ Appellate Tribunal refraining to interfere in appeal against injunction order but observing that Labour Court should look into and decide whether application under S. 39 of Trade Union, in circumstances, was maintainable or not.
1984 P L C 1349 rel.
Bilal Khawaja for Appellants.
M.A. Khan for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 24th October, 1985.
This is an order on the injunction application against which the present appeal is filed.
2. Awami Autos Union is a registered trade union of the workmen employed by Awami Autos Limited. The Awami Autos Ltd. was taken over/ nationalized under President's Order No. 1 of 1972 Economic Reforms Order, 1972). In the said Order, the employees were given due protections. There were 945 workers/ employees appointed by the respondents i.e. Awami Autos Limited. These workers numbering 945 have secured and guaranteed rights under law to continue in the employment of the respondents unless their services were terminated in accordance with Law or transferred in accordance with Law. On 5‑1‑1985, the respondents distributed cyclostyled pro formats amongst the workers requiring them to sign the same in token of resignation from services of the respondents and to seek employment with 'Pak. Suzuki Motor Company Limited' and such pro forma resignations were obtained by force. The respondents, Awami Autos Ltd. is a Unit of 'Pakistan Automobile Corporation Limited which Corporation has other Units numbering about 9‑10. These Units are controlled by the Corporation, are otherwise separate, distinct and independent entities.
3. By certain orders as many as 90 workers were transferred to the respondents from the establishment, namely, 'Sind Engineering Limited'. Due to this transfer the said employees became the employees of the respondents. On 3‑1‑1984, as many as 273 employees were transferred from the respondents establishment to Messrs 'Sind Engineering Limited'. The motive, purpose and intention in doing so can be gathered which is nothing short of an act of mala fide, discrimination and favouritism. There exist immediate apprehension of the retrenchment in the company of Sind Engineering Ltd. in which these employees numbering 273, would be effected. These acts of respondent‑company, namely, Awami Autos Ltd. were resisted by the workers and, therefore, they filed a petition under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The prayer being, that the rights of workers and the union cannot be ordered, changed or curtailed and the employees are to be given the same conditions and terms in service and are to be absorbed with same terms and conditions with Messrs Suzuki Motors Ltd. Lastly, they prayed that the respondents may be restrained to implement the orders of resignations till disposal of this case.
4. Initially a status quo order was granted by the learned Labour Court and finally the Injunction application was decided wherein the Injunction was maintained in respect of these who had not resigned from the establishment of the respondents.
5. I have heard Mr. Bilal Khawaja, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. M.A. Khan for the respondents. This matter involves the case of two sets of workers. The first group of workers are these numbering 893 out of 945 who resigned and obtained employment with Messrs Suzuki Motors Ltd. The others are who had not yet resigned.
6. It has been argued by the learned counsel that those who had resigned could not benefit by the Interim order of Injunction and the same is beyond the scope of section 34 of I.R.O., 1969. This is an injunction application where three factors are to be seen, firstly, that there is a prima facie case of the appellants; secondly, the balance of convenience is enjoyed by the appellants; and thirdly, there will be no irreparable loss if the Injunction is maintained.
7. In the instant case, those who had resigned and are absorbed by Messrs Suzuki Motors Ltd.; and are given the equal rights, terms and conditions, their case could not be dealt by virtue of "fait accompli" and their case could not be touched by order of injunction. The balance of convenience is got to be seen There are 893 out of 945 workers who were already absorbed by Messrs Suzuki Motors Ltd. They were separated from the respondents‑company by virtue of obtaining resignations. How for these resignations were obtained fraudulently or not, this is to be seen by the Court who is presently conducting this matter. Regarding the rest of the workers, proper procedure should be adopted and if this order on Injunction application is vacated, there will be displacement and disturbance in the order of not only Messrs Suzuki Motors Ltd. but in the respondents‑company also which no longer exists. The best course is that I would dismiss this appeal with an observation that all these matters which case for decision in the learned Labour Court must be assessed by the Labour Court himself. The Full Bench decision reported in 1984 P L C 1349, may be looked into whether the application under section 34, I.R.O., 1969, is competent or not. With these words, I dismiss the present appeal.
A. E. Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer