' SYED AKHTAR NAQI NAQVI (SENIOR MEMBER).---1. The aforesaid appeals are directed against a single order, dated 29-8-2005 passed by the learned Member N.I.R.C., Karachi Bench in three Petitions bearing Nos.4A(32) of 2005-K, 4A(38) of 2005/K and 4A(45) of 2005/K filed by the aforesaid appellants. By means of the said petitions the aforesaid three sets of appellants have sought protection under section 10 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002 (henceforth to be called as I.R.O.) in which they had contended that they are permanent workers/ workmen as defined under section 2(xxx) of the I.R.O. However, since the respondent-Management does not issue the appointment letters, service cards, salary/wages slips, leaves and others miscellaneous documents required under different laws to their workers, being aggrieved of that they formed a trade union in the name and style of Messrs Helex Pharma (Pvt.) Ltd. Workers Union on 5-3-2005 and submitted an application for its registration to Joint Director Labour West Division Government of Sindh at Karachi in his position as Registrar, Trade Unions. The appellants apprehended their dismissal, termination lay off and such-like acts of unfair labour practice at the hands of the respondent-Management during the period of pendency of the said petition for registration of said union, hence they filed the aforesaid three petitions which were accompanied by an application under Regulation 32(2) of the N.I.R.C. (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973 for a temporary relief of identical nature.
2. The respondents contested the petitions inter alia on the grounds that the same were not competent and that the appellants were not workmen employed by the respondent-Management and instead they have been appointed by Messrs Siddique Contracting Company. After hearing both the parties and perusal of record, the learned Member/Single Bench vide his order, dated 29- 8-2005 dismissed the three petitions which has been assailed by means of these, appeals separately. Since the same question of law and fact is involved in all the three appeals which have been filed against the single order passed in three petitions, we would dispose of the aforesaid three appeals by means of this single order. We have heard the arguments addressed by the labour representative of the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents and have perused record.
3. Although much has been discussed about the status of the appellants with reference to their appointments by the aforesaid contracting company or otherwise, we would refrain ourselves from discussing the merits of the case for the simple reason that the appellants had sought protection of this Commission under section 10 of the I.R.O. For a limited period so that their application for registration of their union is disposed of by the R.T.U. And they are not victimized by the respondents. Admittedly that stage has passed and the appellants' union has been registered by the said authority. It is admitted by the Labour Representative of the appellants as well as Mr. Faisal Mahmood Ghani learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The relief sought by the appellants was confined to this protection which has been given to them. We would, therefore, observe that any discussion with regard to their status, thereafter, would be uncalled for. In this view of the matter since the relief sought by the appellants has been rendered as infructuous after registration of their union, any grievance with regard to their status, if any, can be raised by means of a different petition before the competent forum. We are therefore, not inclined to dilate upon the merits of the case any more. However, since the Labour Representative of the appellants has contended that the observation made by the learned Member in his impugned order can cause prejudice to his case with regard to the status of the appellants, as worker's, in any other proceedings at a later stage, we would observe that any remarks given about the status of the appellants in the impugned order would not be taken into consideration as adverse against the appellants, since the same are uncalled for and based on no evidence.
4. With these observations, there is nothing to proceed further, hence the aforesaid appeals are dismissed as infructuous. Files be consigned to record.