This is an appeal under section 11 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, against an order of the Registrar, Trade Unions, Lahore, dated 23rd September 1969, whereby the Registrar cancelled the Registration Certificate of the appellant-Union,
2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal, briefly put are these.
3. The General Secretary of the appellant-Union sent an appeal through post to the. Industrial Court, Lahore. The same was returned to the General Secretary on the ground that the appeal could not be accepted through post. The appellant thereafter presented the appeal before the 'Court on 14 November 1969. The appeal was dismissed by the learned Court' on the objection of the respondent that the appeal lay to the Appellate Tribunal and not the Labour Court.At this stage, all that is necessary to observe is that the learned Court had no jurisdiction-to dismiss the appeal.
It should have returned the Memorandum of appeal to the appellant for presentation to the proper Court. An order of dismissal implies jurisdiction.
4. When the matter was taken, up today, the General Secretary of the appellant-Union was present in person. " No one appeared, for the respondent. The appeal was fixed for 18th May 1970, for final disposal. Eighteenth May was declared as a public holiday for Eid-e-Milad-un-Nabi. The matter was, therefore, taken up on 19th May 1970. As the 'matter related to Quetta, an adjournment would have meant unnecessary expense to the appellant and the matter, could not be disposed of before July 19 70. I would, be going to Rawalpindi for some--time in June to dispose of the matters relating to Rawalpindi and Peshawar: I have herd the appellant at length in the absence of -th anyone appearing on -behalf of the respondent Registrar, Trade Unions, and I have gone through the record of the case myself.
5. In order to dispose of the appeal, it would be useful to reproduce a few lines from the operative portion of the order of the Registrar, Trade Unions, West Pakistan, and Lahore. It runs as under:- ---And whereas reply dated '11-12-1968, to the said notice provided by the General Secretary of the Union has been held to be quite unsatisfactory and devoid of facts in the manner that: (I) Non- production of record for inspection is cognisable offence under section 22 read with section 11 of the Ordin--ance, (!i) Non-maintenance of record on the prescribed forms is also an offence under section 23 !bid, (iii) non-compliance of the provision of section 36, (1) ibid as well as registered rules of the Union tantamounting to flagrant violation of law by way of implementing the amendments made in the constitution without first obtaining approval of the Registrar. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers vested in me under section 11 of the West Pakistan Trade Unions Ordinance, 1968, there appears no other alternative but to cancel registration certificate of the W. P.
R. Workers' Union, Quetta, this 9th day of September 1969.---
6. On an analysis of the above order, it would appear that the Registrar cancelled the Registration Certificate mainly on Try three grounds, namely, (I) that the Union had failed to produce the record for inspection, (2) that it had failed to maintain the records in accordance with section 23 of the West Pakistan Trade Unions Ordinance, 1968 (hereinafter called the Ordinance), and (3) that the Union had implemented the amendments in the Constitution without the approval of the Registrar.
I propose to dispose of these grounds separately.
7. Under section 11 (b) (iii) of the Ordinance, the Registrar could cancel the Registration Certificate only if the Trade Union had "wilfully contravened any provision of the Ordinance". In other words, mere contravention of any provision of the Ordin--ance or any of its rules will not empower the Registrar to cancel e the Registration Certificate. A perusal of the impugned order does not show that the Registrar found the appellant to be guilty of wilful contravention of any provision of the Ordinance or any of the rules made thereunder. From the reply to the show-cause notice under section 11 of the Ordinance it would appear that the appellant wanted some more time to comply with the order of the Registrar. The Registrar could have given one more opportunity to the appellant-Union to comply with its order in respect of tide inspection of the record. I am of the view that, in the circumstances of the present case, it cannot be said that the appellant Union wilfully contravened any provision of the Ordinance or the rules made there under.
8. So far as the second ground is concerned, namely, that the appellant-Union did not maintain the record as required under section 23 of the Ordinance, this conclusion is based on no evidence on the record. The case of the Registrar itself was that the appellant had failed to produce the record as required under section 23 of the Ordinance. If the appellant Union did not produce the record, it cannot be held that it was guilty of not maintaining the record in accordance with section 23 of the Ordinance.
9. There is riot much force in the third ground, namely, that the Union had implemented the amendments in the Consti--tution without prior permission of the Registrar. Section 36 of the Ordinance requires that the Registrar shall be informed within 15 days of any alteration made in the rules of a Registered Trade Union. It further lays down that the Registrar may refuse to register such change or alteration if it is in contravention of any of the provisions of the Ordinance; or if it is in violation of the rules of the Trade Union: The Registrar of Trade Union had filed its reply to the Memorandum of appeal before the Industrial Court. The following appears in the said reply:-- "Section 36 of the West Pakistan Trade Unions Ordinance, 1968, read with Rule 9 of the West Pakistan Trade Unions Regulations 1963 provided that amendments made in the Constitution could be implemented only after Registrar Trade Unions had accorded its approval."
10. Rule of the West Pakistan Trade Unions Regulations, 1963 (hereinafter called the Regulations), reads as under:- "The fee payable for the registration of a Trade Union shall be five rupees."
11. Rule 10 of the Regulations, which applies to amend--ment of the rules, reads as under:
(l) On receiving a copy of an alteration made in rules of a Trade Union under subsection (3) of section 28, the Registrar unless he has reasons to believe that the alteration has not been made in the manner provided by the rules of the Trade Union shall register the alteration in a register to be maintained for this purpose, and shall notify the fact that he has done so to the Secretary of the Trade Union.
(2) The fee payable for, registration of alteration of rules shall be one rupee for each set of alterations made simultaneously."
12. A perusal of the above rules would show that all that the Registrar was required was to see as to whether the amend--ments made in the rules were permitted by the rules of the Trade: Union or not. If it was not in contravention of the rules of the Union, he had no option but to sanction the amendments. So far as section 36 of the Ordinance is concerned, the Registrar could also refuse change or alteration in the rules if it was in contravention of any of the provisions of the Ordinance, or was in violation of the rules of the Trade Union. One thing is very clear, so far as section 36 of the Ordinance, read with rule 10 of the Regulations, is concerned, that the power of the Registrar was limited to find out as to whether the alterations in the rules were in conformity with the Ordinance and the rules of the Union. If they were in conformity with the same, the Registrar had, under rule 10 of the Regulations, no option but to permit the alterations. There is nothing in section 36 of the Ordinance, pr in rule 10 of the Regulations, reproduced above, whereby the Union was restrained from implementing the alterations in the rules without the permission of the Registrar of Trade Unions. It, however, follows from section 36 of the Ordinance and rule 10, of the Regulations that the Union could .not implement the alterations in the rules unless sanction bad been given by the Registrar. The Registrar was expected to grant its sanction or refuse the same within a reasonable bare. Section 36 of the Ordinance; rule 10 of the Regulations do not provide any time-limit for the Registrar within which he has to accord his sanction or to refuse the same. He must, however, .act within a reasonable time, It was stated by the General Secretary of the Union, who appeared before me, that the Union did not generally implement the proposed alterations except in one respect, namely, that it had opened Branch Offices of the Union at several places. The Union should have waited for the order of the Registrar before implementing any of alterations in the rules of the Union.
13. I would, for the reasons given above, hold that therewas no wilful default on the 'Dart of the Union- to produce its record or to maintain the record in accordance with section 23, 7 of the Ordinance.further hold that there was no wilful disregard of section 36, of the Ordinance or rule 10, of the Regulations on the part of the Union. In these circumstances, I would set aside the order, of the Registrar cancelling the Registration 'Certificate and remand the case to the Registrar of Trade Unions, Lahore. It is further ordered that the- General Secretary of the Union, who is present before me today, should appear before the Registrar on 1June 1970. If the Registrar is not available on 1 June 1970, he should appear before him on the following day, till he is able to see him. He should take-a date from the Registrar for production of such documents as he or his authorised Officer may order the General Secretary to produce. If the Registrar or the Officer appointed by him wishes to inspect the Head Office of the Union, the General Secretary should provide all facility to inspect the record of the Union. In the meantime, the appellant Union must close all the Branch Offices of the Union till the Registrar gives approval of the amendment in the rules. In case the Union fails to comply with the order of the Registrar, as observed above, the Registrar can pass such order as he thinks necessary.st st
14. Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. Hayat Pasha, General Secretary, West Pakistan Railway Workers' Union--- Quetta for the Registrar--- Trade Unions, Lahore.