' JUSTICE (R.) ABDUL HAFEEZ CHEEMA, (CHAIRMAN).---This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 4-11-2008 whereby the prayer of the appellant for cancellation of their transfer orders from Dhurnal Operation Plant to Port Qasim Filling Plant at Karachi of the respondent company was rejected by Labour Court No,6, Rawalpindi.
2. The facts leading to this appeal briefly are that the appellants are the members of the trade union and were performing .Their duties with dedication at the Dhurnal Filling Plant of the respondent company. However, the company abruptly transferred them to Karachi vide order dated 15-8-2008. These orders it is alleged, were actuated by malice and they were issued on the pretext that the company had suffered huge losses in their business as such they were obliged to close down the Filling Plant at Dhurnal. They filed a petition .Before the Punjab Labour Court No,6, Rawalpindi on the aforesaid ground which enjoyed a due contest from both sides and ultimately the same was dismissed vide impugned judgment referred to above.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the trial Court has not taken note of the fact that the plant was still operational and certain employees were still performing their duties there. On account of their trade union activities they have been punished by means of transfer to Karachi. The respondents refuted all these assertions and claimed that they had cordial relations with the union and had no grouse whatsoever against them. It was however on account of the Law and order situation obtaining in the country generally and, particularly in the Northern areas, that they had suffered colossal loss in their business as such they were obliged to close down the Filling Station at Dhurnal. This situation required the employer to ensure reorganization of the business and this was the real fact and there was no mala fide in transferring them to Port Qasim Plant at Karachi.
4. The learned Labour Court No,6, Rawalpindi recorded the evidence of the parties, heard the arguments and by a well reasoned judgement dismissed the petition filed by the appellant. The learned Judge concluded that:--
(i) That on account of the financial constraints the respondents had already reduced their number of officials and had dispensed with services of over two dozens of their Officers.
(ii) That at Dhurnal Plant the filling operation has been stopped and no working of the company is carried out. The company has placed on record their financial statements/ audit reports of the Chartered Accountants showing huge losses to the company.
(iii) That even in the very letter of appointment it was clearly laid down that the place of working presently will be at Dhurnal. However, the employee may be transferred at any Plant of the company from time to time or any other establishment of the company in Pakistan and this was agreed to by the appellants at the time of joining their services.
(iv) That the transfers have been made on account of genuine necessity of the company and no malice was involved.
5. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned, counsel for the parties and have also perused the record with full care and attention.
6. The employer by producing the annual audit reports financial statements in respect of the relevant years has shown that their company had suffered financial loss during the said period.
The Audit Reports prepared by Messrs A.F. Ferguson and Company a renowned company of the Chartered Accountants vide Exh.R-21 are at pages Nos.511 to 553 of the lower court's file. The said Chartered company reported that during the year 2007 the company had suffered a net loss of Rs,239.5 millions and total carried forward loss was Rs,318.970 millions. This fact was supported by Mr. Muhammad Mohsin Khan, Head of Corporate Affairs of the company while appearing as R.W.1 that the company had suffered huge losses due to decrease in demand of their products owing to the prevalent situation in the Northern Areas which had necessitated to make certain reorganization.
7. Due to these financial constraints resulting from huge loss sustained by the employer, the company was compelled to affect reorganization. As a result of this development certain employees had to be transferred and number of officers were relieved of their duties / retrenched.
8. This was also admitted by the General Secretary of the appellant union while appearing as P.W.1.
This fact alone was enough to establish that the transferred employees were surplus at Attock Filling Station. It is an established rule that in such a situation it is the employer and employer alone who is to determine as to what was the company's financial position and has the right to reorganize the institution and to retrench its employees.
9. During the course of arguments the court asked the appellants who were present in person in the court as to what was grievance of the respondent company which obliged them to transfer them to Karachi and none of them could say anything substantial The respondent company appears to be quite upright in its dealing. They appear to have been fair to each and every employee and even in the transfer orders they had expressed their inability to continue the functioning of the Dhurnal Plant and offered generous terms to the appellants in case they comply with their transfer orders and perform their duties at Karachi.
10. It is noteworthy that right from the filing of the grievance petition at Rawalpindi and obtaining a stay order till the decision of the appeal they have been sitting idle at the plant and had been getting their salaries without any work. When this situation was put by the learned counsel for the respondent company to the appellants they kept mum and gave no answer. To me it appears that the entire stand of the appellants is fake and unfounded; company's stance was genuine and fair; the appellants should have complied with the transfer orders and their defiance had no justification whatsoever.
11. In this situation even if the company had retrenched them they were in their rights to do so. The judgment of the learned lower court is well reasoned and there appears to be no flaw or infirmity in it. The appeal is devoid of any merit and is hereby dismissed.