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.
Case No. 4(342) of 1984, decided on 20th January, 1985.
---Ss. 15 & 53--Unfair labour practice--Employer alleged to have called complainant in his office anti asked to withdraw from election contest- Alleged incident appearing concocted--Complaint dismissed by N.I.R.C.
Muhammad Sadiq Warraich for Petitioner. K.M. Pasha for Respondent.
I have, today, dismissed the titled complaint for the following reasons:--
(1) The incident, dated the 4th December, 1984 appears to be concocted because on that day neither respondent No. 1 nor 3 were present in the factory. Respondent No. 1 was on leave due to sickness while respondent No. 3 was in England on that day.
(2) As for the incident of 20-12-1984, when respondent No. 2 is alleged to have called the complainant in his office and had asked him to withdraw his name from election contest, the incident appears to have been concocted, for the following reasons:
(a) Muhammad Fazal Clerk Grade-III was present in the office alongwith another workman, when respondent No. 2 is reported to have asked him to leave the union, and not to take part in union's election. Respondent No. 2 ought to be given the credit of some intelligence. He obviously could not ask that incriminating question to the petitioner, who had been criticising him on the question of substandard supply of mutton, etc. on comparatively higher rates, in the presence of two witnesses, one of whom was the Vice-President of the Union.
(b) In his statement he said that he received the copy of show-cause notice from respondent No. 2 in his office while in his complaint he said that he received it from respondent No. 1.
(c) The elections programme of the Union shows that nominations were to be declared accepted by the Election Commission on 24-12-1984, thus,. on 20-12-1984 when the Election Commission had not even approved his name there was no question of asking him to withdraw.
(d) There were ten other persons contesting the Union's election. There was no specific reason why the complainant only should have been asked not to contest for the office of Public Relations Secretary.
A.E.
Complaint dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer