' BASHIR AHMED MEMON (MEMBER).--- This is application under Regulation 32(2)(c) of NIRC (P&F)
Regulations, 1973 filed by the petitioner, who has filed a petition under section 49(4)(e) of I.R.O., 2002 against the respondents.
2. In the petition it has been asserted by the petitioner that in petitioner's establishment respondent No,1 is a registered trade union and C.B.A. On 30-12-2006 respondent No,1 union served notice under section 25(1) of the I.R.O., 2002 supported by charter of demands, Annexure "A/1", whereas petitioner management also served a notice under section 25(1) of the I.R.O., 2002 along with their charter of demands on the C.B.A., Annexure "A/2". Thereafter bilateral negotiations were held between 9-1- 2007 to 13-3-2007 but the talks failed and then respondent No,1 and also the petitioner served notices of conciliation under section 25(3) of the I.R.O., 2002 for initiating conciliation proceedings, Annexures "A/3" and "A/3(i)", on which Assistant Director Labour (Conciliation) East Division, Karachi issued notice, dated 14-3-2007 for conciliation on both the charter of demands, Annexures "A/3(ii) " and "A/3(iii)". It has been further asserted by the petitioner in their petition that during the pendency of conciliation proceedings, respondent No,1 union and its office-bearers members started committing acts of unfair labour practice in order to pressurize and compel the petitioner management to accept the demands of respondent No,1 union. It has been asserted that respondents Nos.1 to 5 on 21-5-2007 displayed the banner outside the factory levelling some allegations against the management of petitioner; photograph of the banner has been annexed as Annexure "A/4" with the petition. It has been further alleged by the petitioner that on 22-5-2007 at about 12-05 noon, respondents Nos.2 to 5 obtained permission for leaving the factory premises for going to the office of Workers Welfare Board but instead they rushed towards Head Office of the petitioner establishment situated at Beaumont Plaza, Beaumont Road, Karachi and displayed two banners in front of building of Head Office behind PIDC House, photographs of the banners have been annexed with the petition as Annexures "A/5" and "A/6". Therefore, it has been prayed that respondents Nos.1 to 5 by way of above mentioned acts were trying to pressurize the petitioner management and were also trying to damage the reputation of the petitioner company in the eyes of general public and in this respect the petitioner has also written letter to the Joint Director Labour (East) Division, Karachi informing him about the situation on 23-5-2007, copy of the letter has been produced as Annexure "A/7" with the petition, as such the acts of the respondents were in violation-of section 64(1)(d) and section 64(1)(f) of the I.R.O., 2002 which are acts of unfair labour practice and this Bench of Commission was prayed to deal with the respondents and restraining order was requested in respect of displaying the banners, placards, posters, wall chalking etc. Near the factory and head office. It was also prayed that this Bench of Commission shall also pass restraint order restraining respondent No,1 and through its workers not to raise slogans, demonstration and acts aimed to pressurize the management for the purpose of acceptance of their demands.
3. On presentation of petition on 28-5-2007 after hearing the counsel for the petitioner ad-interim proluhitory order was passed by this Bench of Commission and notice was issued to the respondents for their comments and counter affidavit.
4. The respondents filed their comments on main petition and counter affidavit on stay application.
The respondents have denied all the allegations levelled by the petitioner against them.
5. I have heard arguments of Mr. Faisal Mahmood Ghani, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. M.A.K. Azmati, learned advocate for the respondents and have gone through the pleadings of the parties and entire material placed on record by them and I have also perused the newspapers clippings and photographs regarding the banners displayed by the respondents.
6. From the pleadings of the petitioner it is very well established that respondents were resorting to acts of unfair labour practice and when the matter regarding conciliation was already pending before the area conciliator then there was no justification to display the banners. It all amounts to acts of creating pressure upon the petitioner management for acceptance of their demands.
In view of above facts and circumstances of the case I am of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of relief, as such the interim prohibitory order, dated 28-5-2007 passed by this Bench of Commission is confirmed and the parties are directed to adduce their evidence in respect of their contentions. Put off to 20-5-2009 for filing affidavit- evidence by the petitioner.
Announced in open Court.