1. ' JUSTICE (RTD.) ALI MUHAMMAD BALOCH (CHAIRMAN).--- This is a revision application under section 55(4) of the Industrial Relations Act, 2008. It was heard on 3-2-2010 on which date pre-admission notice was issued to the respondents Nos.2 to 6 and the case was fixed for hearing on 18-2-2010.
2. Messrs Hameedullah Khan and Ghafoor Khan, Advocates appeared on behalf of the respondents Nos.2 to 6 (Abdul Aziz Baloach, Mehboob Zaman, Muhammad Ismail, Ch. Jawaid-ur-Rehman and Abdul Majeed).
3. ' Heard Mr. Shaukat Ali Ch. Counsel for Adamjee Insurance Company Limited and Messrs Hameedullah Khan and Ghafoor Khan, Advocates for respondents Nos.2 to 6 in detail today.
4. ' I have gone through the impugned order dated 12th January, 2010 passed by respondent No,1, the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No,V, Karachi, and also perused all other relevant papers of the case.
5. In fact this case was filed for revising the impugned order, passed by the learned Labour Court, dismissing the application under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. And leaving undecided the application for condensation of delay with observations for leading some evidence. Learned Counsel for the applicant/informant Adamjee Insurance Company Limited has invoked the powers of this Tribunal under section 55(4) of the IRA 2008 under which this Tribunal had to satisfy itself as to the correctness, legality and propriety of the order of Lower Court. I found no incorrectness, illegality or impropriety with the impugned orders and therefore, did not consider to pass any order whereby the impugned order be revised in any manner. The facts of the case show that Adamjee Insurance Company Limited had a workshop in which respondents Nos.2 to 6 worked as employees, but on 2- 1-2009 all the employees i.e, respondents Nos.2 to 6 were removed from service by way of retrenchment. The respondents Nos.2 to 6 for the purpose of relief had approached the N.I.R.C.
6. Karachi Bench and had prayed for injunction, so that they may continue in employment.
7. Application for injunction moved by respondents Nos.2 to 6 was dismissed. Therefore, they went in appeal before full Bench of N.I.R.C. The remedy of injunction was also declined by the Full Bench on N.I.R.C. And the appeal was dismissed. I find from the papers that the single Bench of N.I.R.C. Karachi had verdicted for the petitioners to approach proper forum which was Labour Court. After such advice, it appears that the workers approached the learned Labour Court No,V, Karachi.
8. After their approach to the learned Labour Court there was a contest between he workers and the management of Adamjee Insurance Company Limited. The parties thereafter filed two interlocutory applications, which were decided as narrated above. The company thereafter filed the present revision application before this Tribunal. One was moved by the management for orders under Order VII, rule 11 C.P.C. And the other was moved by the respondents Nos.2 to 6 under section 5 of Limitation Act. I have already held that the order was neither illegal nor improper for the intervention. The learned Labour Court who had dismissed the application under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C. And left the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act to be decided on merits after recording evidence. Today after hearing of both parties in detail, 1 have not been persuaded by any of the parties to revise the impugned order. As regards the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the same was left rightly undecided, with observation by the learned Labour Court that the same may De decided after recording the evidence of both the parties, such decision was passed on the findings of the Superior Courts, I also rely on such findings of the superior judiciary and, therefore, find that this is a fit and proper case which should be sent back to the learned Labour Court with a direction that without wasting any further time, learned Labour Court should decide the entire case under which grievance notice was given and litigation should come to an end within three months. Learned counsel for the applicant led much stress on the fact that the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act should have been decided first, even prior to the order on application under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C., but I leave this fact for consideration of the learned Labour Court. Learned Counsel for the respondents led stress on the fact that the employer should not delay the matter and the Labour Court should decide the case on merits as early as possible. With the above observations, this revision application stands dismissed.