' ABDUL GHIAS NOUSHERWANI (MEMBER).--- This Revision Petition is directed against the Judgment dated 6-10-2011 passed by learned District and Session Judge 1st Labour Court Balochistan whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging the registration of the union has been dismissed.
2. The relevant facts arising out of instant appeal are that respondent No,1 submitted an application for registration of its union in the name and style of "Livestock Peoples Workers Union Balochistan" before Registrar Trade Union Balochistan. The application was entertained and pursuant in such request the Registrar Trade Union wide letter 5th August, 2009 has registered the union and issue such certificate. The petitioner approached the Registrar Trade Union time and again for cancellation of the registration issued in favour of the respondent by filing various applications on the ground that such type of union could only be formed by the persons who were defined as workers/workmen, In view of the provisions of section 2 (H) of the Factories Act, 1934 and section 2(1)(N) of the Workman's Compensation Act, 1923 but the respondent No,2 delayed the matter on one pretext or the other. Lastly the respondent No,2 was approached through letter 31st January, 2011 but till today the registration certificate of respondent No,1 has not been cancelled.
The petitioner presented an appeal before District and Session Judge 1st Labour Court Quetta challenging the 'registration of respondent union which was dismissed on 6-10-2011.
3. The learned counsel for appellant contended that the Presiding Officer seems to be confused about the impact of the judgment by the honorable Supreme Court as is evident in concluded Para of the impugned Judgment. Secondly contended that Registrar Trade Union has no jurisdiction to issue certificate of registration in favour of the respondent union particularly when the respondent union are neither workers nor workman as defined section 2(H) of Factories Act and section 2(N) of Workman Compensation Act. Lastly contended that respondent No,2 has totally ignored the relevant provisions of law and despite several applications have been filed to cancel the certificate of registration. The learned counsel for respondent No,1 on the other hand contended that the workers formed the union and all are workmen under the Labour Law and appellant department is running the dairy farm/poultry farm and falls within the ambit of commercial establishment besides this the respondent No,1 fulfilled all the requirements for registration and thereafter the respondent No,2 conducted an inquiry after satisfaction, legally registered the union. The representative of Registrar Trade Union submitted that in the light of decision of honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan reported in 1997 SCM R 66 the respondent No,1 applied for registration.
After conducting such inquiry certificate of registration issued to respondent No, 1.
4. Both the learned counsel relied upon the judgment of honorable High Court of Balochistan in C.P.
No,397 of 1992 and 1997 SCM R 66 of honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan.
5. The Learned Labour Court relied upon Judgment of honorable High Court of Balochistan bearing C.P. No,397 of 1992 and the judgment of honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan reported 1997 SCM R
66. The Honorable High Court of Balochistan in above mentioned Constitutional Petition concluded as under:--- "26. Summing up the above discussion, it may be reiterated that unless Registrar of Trade Unions or Labour Court had come to the conclusions that the employees who had formed unions fall within the category of worker/workman provisions of I.R.O do not apply and Registrar and Labour Court had no authority at all to adjudicate upon the matter; let alone ordering registration of such unions.
We are, therefore, inclined to declare the order of the Labour Court directing registration of the unions mentioned hereinabove as well as order of the Registrar of the Unions issuing certificates of registration of the said unions as having been passed without lawful authority and thus of no legal affect.
27. However, it may be observed that those employees of the said Government Departments, who consider themselves to fall within the category of worker/workman as defined in the Factories Act, 1934 and Workman's Compensation Act, 1923 may apply afresh before appropriate forums who shall before passing any order on the same determine whether they in fact fall within the category of worker/workman as defined in the Factories Act, 1934 or Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and then alone shall be competent to pass orders in accordance with law. In that event it would be necessary to issue notice to the Government/employer in order to furnish details of nature of work or to place other necessary and relevant information regarding the duties being performed or salaries being drawn by such employees"
' The honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Agriculture Workers Union Balochistan v.
The Registrar Trade Union of Balochistan reported 1997 SCM R 66 observed as under (relevant page 75):--- "5. In view of the preceding discussion, we are of the opinion that respondent No 1 was not justified in declining to entertain the request of appellants for registration as a Trade Union on account of the order of this Court dated 7-10-1992 declining leave to appeal against the order of High Court dated 14-7-1992 on the petition of the appellants. As pointed out by us earlier, the observations of learned High Court of Balochistan in C.P. 90 of 1992 which left open to the appellants to approach afresh to respondent No,1 for their registration as a Trade Union under the Ordinance if they could satisfy respondent No,1 that their members though employed in a Government department, fell within the category of worker/workman as defined in the Factories Act, 1934 and workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, was neither interfered with, nor set aside and therefore, the respondent No,1 ought to have held enquiry in the light of observations of the High Court to determine whether, the appellants qualified for registration as a Trade Union or not.
6. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the High Court and remand the case to respondent No,1 for disposal in accordance with the law. In the circumstances of the case, we will make no order as to costs."
6. In view of above Judgments/observations the matter left and remanded to Registrar Trade Union respondent No,2 with direction on approach of petitioner afresh, for their registration as a trade union under the Ordinance if they could satisfy the Registrar Trade Union that their members though employed in Government Department fell within the category of workers/workman as defined in Factories Act. After inquiry then competent to pass orders in accordance with law. It would be necessary for Registrar Trade Union to issue notice to the Government/Employer in order to furnish details of nature of work or to place other necessary relevant information regarding the duties being performed or salaries being drawn by such employees.
7. In view of above observation of honorable Superior Courts the Registrar Trade Union in the case of present appellant for cancellation of registration of the union conducted an inquiry which concluded in the following terms:--- "In view of above judgment and observations by different Courts statements by the President/General Secretary of the union in question and various letters by Registrar Trade Unions to different Departments such as Law Department and other Law Experts it has been obviously to state here that the letter by the Live Stock Department to Registrar Trade Union Balochistan for cancellation of the Live Stock Peoples Workers Union has no weight and backing of law, because the above Judgment of the Superior Court has left no stone unturned for the formation and Registration of the Unions of workers in Governmental Departments/Institutions."
8. I have given anxious consideration to the various points urged by the parties and have gone through the record, in the light of above mentioned decision of Superior Courts. I came to the conclusion that paramount question for consideration is that person performing functions in connection with the administration of the State employed in Government Department are not entitled for forming union and its registration. The interpretation of "Administration of State" has been discussed by the superior Courts wherein majority view of the honorable Supreme Court on the subject is that the expression "Administration of the State" should be interpreted in limited and narrow sense of the practical management and direction of the executive machinery or the operation of the various organs of the sovereign or .Conducting or carrying on the details of the Government. This expression does not extend to those employees of the State who are worker and performed duties in administration of state like Malis, Chowkidars, Budders, Beldars, Tubewell Machines, Drivers etc.
9. In a case reported PLD 1992 Supreme Court 17 it is observed, "Following the test laid down in this judgment I am inclined to agree with my learned brother that the appellant, being a Chowkidar in a directorate concerned with mobilizing savings in the country, can hardly be described as a person employed in the administration of State."
"It is worth to mention here that this proposition had already come before the Supreme Court in the case of Employees Old-Age Benefit Institution v. NIRC (1988 SCM R 765) where following conclusion was drawn:--- ' The expression administration of the State is to be interpreted in a limited and narrow sense of the practical management and direction of the executive machinery or the operation of the various organs of the sovereign or conducting or carrying on the details of the Government. Likewise in 'Constitutions Petition No,192 of 1991 a Division Bench of this court while following the aforesaid ratio decidendi dismissed a petition wherein it was contended that the petitioner factory had been setup as subsidiary of Shaheen Foundation Pakistan Air Force and beneficiaries therefrom are persons connected with or incidental to Pakistan Air Force. It was argued that by virtue of section 1(3)(b) of IRO petitioner-Factory was exempted from the application of IRO."
10. From above interpretation and conclusion drawn in reported judgment 1997 SCM R 66 is that the nature of work of the employees is the basic element to distinguish the employees performing functions in connections with the administration of the state and others categories like Malis, Chowkidars, Budders, Beldars, Tubewell Machines, Drivers etc. The Registrar Trade Union in the light of aforesaid judgment conducted an inquiry and after satisfaction that the union fulfils all legal requirements to be registered with the Registrar Trade Union therefore in such legal position the registration of respondent No,1 cannot be cancelled. The order of learned Labour Court is neither arbitrary nor perverse to invite interference by this Tribunal in appeal. Consequently revision is dismissed with no order as to cost.
11. The copy of order along with original record of trail court be sent to trial court. Case after completion be consigned to record.