1. ' KHAWAJA NAVEED AHMED, J.--- This C.P. Has been filed by Messrs A&B Beverages Ltd. Against the impugned order passed by the Registrar of Trade Unions, Sindh dated 16-1-1999 and order of the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No,V, Sindh, Karachi announced on 31-5-1999 in the matter of Appeal No,1 of 1999 under section 11(b) of the I.R.O., 1969. This petition was filed on 20-12-2000 and had come up before the Court for hearing on 22-12-2000 when Court was pleased to issue pre- admission notice to respondents for 26-12-2000 thereafter the matter had been adjourned on each date of hearing on the request of Advocates from both sides. However, it was heard by me on 26-3-2008. The case of Messrs A&B Beverages filed through its President Sadiq Ali is that the Union is a registered trade union, which was registered on 19-2-1991 with Registrar of Trade Unions, Sindh Karachi, who had issued such certificate on Form S-B. The case of the petitioner is that the employers had illegally terminated the services of its workmen and thereafter had applied to Sindh Labour Court No,III for grant of permission under S.O. 11-A of the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 for closure of its entire establishment. This application was allowed by the Sindh Labour Court No,III by order, dated 24-11-1994. The Union had challenged this order in C.P. No,D-3 of 1995, which was allowed by the High Court by order, dated 15-4-1995. The High Court had remanded back the case of the Labour Court in the light of observation made by the Court in the judgment, dated 15-4-1995. The case of the petitioner is that the Sindh Labour Court No,III had again dismissed the petition by order, dated 1-10-1998 ignoring the guideline given by the High Court. Petitioner again came to the High Court in C.P. No,S-472 of 1998. In the meantime while C.P. No,S-472 of 1998 was pending adjudication in High Court the Registrar of Trade Unions had cancelled the registration of the petitioners-Union on the ground that the Company had been closed pursuant to the permission granted to the Company under the Ordinance. The cancellation was done on 16-1-1999. This order was challenged in appeal before the Labour Court, which was dismissed by order, dated 31-5-1999. The C.P. No,S-472 of 1998 came up for hearing before the Honourable High Court on 15-11-1999 when it was allowed and order of the Labour Court dated 1-10-1998 was set aside and Labour Court was directed to decide the matter afresh. When matter came to the Labour Court for fresh decision the registration of the union had already been cancelled by that time. The Court raised objection that the registration of the Union has been cancelled therefore, could not proceed.
2. ' The learned counsel for the petitioner says that under these circumstances the present petition has been filed as now the petitioner has no locus standi to contest their case in Labour Court as their registration has been illegally cancelled by the Registrar, Trade Unions. The learned counsel has argued that the permission to close the establishment was granted under S.O. 11-A. The registration was cancelled because factory had been closed. The permission order under S.0.11-A was set aside by the High Court. It is argued that under the circumstances the cancellation order of petitioner's registration became non-existent. It has further been argued that the registration of union can be cancelled when either it dissolved itself or ceases to exist. Mr. Shehenshah Hussain, Advocate states that Registrar has acted ultra vires as he had no powers to deregister the union on the ground that the company has ceased to exist.
3. ' Mr. Gohar Iqbal, Advocate states that the company has been closed and Commissioner can be appointed to inspect the premises.
4. ' Mr. Shehenshah Hussain, Advocate states that the same owners are doing business under a new name.
5. ' I had offered to Mr. Shehenshah Hussain, Advocate that Court can send Commissioner to examine whether the same people are owners of new establishment or it is a new company, which is functioning on the site of A&B Beverages, Ltd. The memorandum of Articles of Association can also be ceased (sic). Mr. Shehenshah Hussain had declined this offer and had insisted that the permission for closure was illegally granted and High Court had made observations, which were not followed by the Labour Court and as such in the circumstances during pendency of all these proceedings deregistration of the union was illegal.
6. ' Technically there may be force in the arguments of learned counsel, but practically speaking the company does not exist at all. It is now not material as to whether the permission of closure under S.O.11-A of the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 was legal or not. Fact remains that company no more exist. Whereabouts of owners are not known. In the circumstances the entire cause of action in my humble opinion has become infructuous. Since the company is not in existence therefore, any order passed by this Court shall not be executable. The Courts do not pass such order, which cannot be executed.
7. ' In the circumstances and for the foregoing reasons I dismiss this petition with no order as to costs.