' CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ, J.--- This writ petition has been directed against the order dated 19-12- 2008 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer Punjab Labour Court No,7 Gujranwala.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed an application under section 33 of I.R.O., 2002 for cancellation of registration of trade union on the ground that the petitioner is a society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act and being a non-commercial association, its function is to look after the society premises, welfare of its members, maintenance and security of the premises and for the very purposes, the society has employed security guards, sweepers and gardeners on contract basis who are not permanent employees, so Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002 is not applicable to the petitioner society. It was also argued that the employees are not workmen under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002, so they cannot form a trade union and get it registered. It was further contended that respondent "No,2 did not associate the petitioner in the process of issuance of C.B.A. Certificate which was registered by the respondent. No,2 without any notice or prior information to the petitioner. The petitioner society applied for the cancellation of registration of union on 14-4-2008.
3. The respondents were summoned. Respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 submitted their written replies separately. Respondents Nos.1 and 2 have affirmed in written replies that the petitioner is a commercial society who employed security guards, sweepers and other staff, therefore, the application is not maintainable, so it be dismissed.
4. While respondent No,3 maintained that the petitioner is legally competent to file petition. All the members have completed their qualifying service of three months for the purpose of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002 and the petitioner society is covered under the definition of "establishment" as provided under subsection (11) of the Ordinance ibid. All the employees fall within the definition of employer and workmen. The trade unions in the name and style of WAPDA Town Employees Union WAPDA Town, Gujranwala was registered after fulfilling all the legal formalities.
5. After hearing both the parties vide order dated 19-12-2008, the learned District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer Punjab Labour Court No,7, Gujranwala allowed the application of the petitioner and the matter was remanded to' 'the respondent No,2 (Registrar Trade Unions Gujranwala) with a direction to decide the controversy of registration after associating the employer'. Hence this petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order dated 19-12-2008 passed by respondent No,3 be set aside and be declared illegal and null and void because the impugned order has been passed in clear violation of the provisions of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002 which was repealed before passing the impugned order and Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2008 was enacted by notification in gazette on 15-1-2008. Respondent No,2 has admitted in his written reply that he has registered the petitioner union after adopting the legal procedure and fulfilment of the requirements, whatsoever, required under the law.
7.On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently opposed this writ petition and has contended that the writ petition is not maintainable, the impugned order has been passed in accordance with law and it is in the interest of justice that the Registrar Trade.
Unions decided the matter after associating the employer.
8. I have anxiously heard the, arguments put forth by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record available on file with their able assistance,
9. A simple controversy between the parties is as to whether the consent of employer of a trade union is necessary before its registration. ,The law laid down by honourable Supreme Court provides that the employer or even a trade union had no locus standi to maintain the grievance petition merely because objection raised by them had not been attended by the Registrar or the employer or the trade union had not been associated with the process of registration. One trade union could not be an aggrieved party by registration of another union because such action would not violate any of the right, granted by the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002 to the former. The matter of registration of a trade union is only between the trade union which, apply for registration and the Registrar of Trade Unions and the employer or others have no concern, whatsoever, in the matter: The employer could not claim any locus standi to challenge the decision of the Registrar merely on the ground that no opportunity of hearing was provided to him or objection raised before the Registrar of Trade Unions was, not considered before taking such decision. I am fortified by ratio decidendi laid down in the cases 'reported as 1998 PLC 500, 2006 PLC 288 and 2007 PLC 521.
10. In the nutshell, the learned Punjab Labour Court No,7, Gujranwala has erred while holding that the matter be remanded to the Registrar, Trade Unions with the direction to decide the matter of registration after associating the employer in the proceedings. Resullantly, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order dated 19-12-2008 passed by learned Punjab Labour Court No,7, Gujranwala is set aside.