' Farrukh Naeem Butt, respondent, filed a petition under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, before Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad on 7-8-1980 against his termination order dated 24-5-1980. On that day i. e. 7-8-1980 the said Labour Court was not functioning as the Presiding Officer had gone abroad on long leave. Therefore, on 9-8-1980 the respondent filed a petition under section 38(7) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, before this Tribunal for transfer of the case from Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad to Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore. It was mentioned in the transfer petition that even the Presiding Officer of Punjab Labour Court No, 4, Faisalabad was on leave till 22-8-1980. It was further mentioned in it that the matter was very urgent one as the interim relief had been prayed for in the petition alongwith the main case and that the order regarding the interim relief sought for must be passed within a very short time, which was not possible from Punjab Labour Court No, 5 or 4, Faisalabad. Since Punjab Labour Courts Nos. 4 and 5 at Faisalabad were not functioning, this Tribunal on 9-8-1980 without issuing any motice to the opposite-party (present petitioner Bank) transferred the case to Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore for its disposal in accordance with law. The respondent without following the normal regular procedure for waiting Robcaar from the office of this Tribunal and getting the case transferred from Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad, he himself presented a fresh petition under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, before Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore on the same day i. e. 9-8-1980 with a copy of the transfer order passed by this Tribunal on 9-8-1980.
Labour Court No. 1 issued notice on 10-8-1980 to the petitioner Bank for 30-S-1980 when the representative of the Management appeared and the case was adjourned to 4-9-1980 for written reply. Meanwhile the petitioner Bank also received a notice from Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad to appear before it on 2-9-1980. On 2-9-1980 the respondent appeared before Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad and made a statement to withdraw his grievance petition on the ground that another similar petition filed in Lahore was already pending before Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore. The Labour Court allowed him to withdraw the petition as prayed for.
2. On 1-9-1980 the petitioner Bank filed the present transfer petition before this Tribunal, praying that the grievance petition of the respondent pending before Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore be transferred to Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad, which has the territorial jurisdiction.
3. I have heard at length the counsel for the parties and have also perused the entire material available on the record.
4. The main argument to oppose this transfer petition advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent is that since this Tribunal has already exercised its jurisdiction under section 38(7) by transferring the case from Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad to Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore, to exercise this power again will amount to review its previous order dated 9-8-1980, but under the statute this Tribunal has got no such power of review. According to the learned counsel, even a fresh application on new grounds cannot be made if once this power has been exercised by the Tribunal in a particular case. However, the learned counsel for the respondent has not been able to cite any authority in support of his argument. On the other hand, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner Bank, there is no such legal bar upon the powers of the Tribunal and that the power can be exercised repeatedly, if justified by new grounds and circumstances. In the instant case, the fresh grounds alleged by the petitioner-Bank to justify the transfer of the case from Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore to Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad are:
(1) that Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad is now functioning since long;
(2) that the case lies within the territorial jurisdiction of Punjab Labour Court No, 5 Faisalabad: In fact as mentioned above, the respondent himself had intially submitted himself to the jurisdiction of Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad by filing his petition before it;
(3) that the balance of convenience is in favour of the Court having torritorial jurisdiction as it is more convenient for both the parties to produce their respective evidence before it;
(4) that the transfer petition was a motivated one, otherwise there was no ground of urgency available to the respondent for getting the case transferred to Punjab Lahore Court No. 1, Lahore; and
(5) that the earlier transfer order was passed ex parte without issuing any notice or otherwise affording any opportunity to the petitioner-Bank to oppose it.
5. It is well settled now that there can be genuine grounds and circumstances to justify the transfer of a case second time, otherwise it will create complications and prejudice to one of the parties.
Moreover, considerations under section 38(7) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, are not always purely judicial in nature but more or less are executive-cum-judicial. Therefore, there cannot be any legal bar for exercising power under section 38(7), more than once, if justified by new grounds and circumstances and consequently the question of review of previous order would not arise.
6. It is not denied that earlier this Tribunal transferred the petition of the respondent from Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad to Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore solely on the ground that Punjab Labour Court No, 5 Faisalabad as well as Punjab Labour Court No, 4, Faisalabad was not functioning at that time and the respondent showed urgency of the matter to get some interim relief. Now admittedly the situation has entirely changed as Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad, which is the original Court having territorial jurisdiction, is functioning. Moreover, balance of convenience is also in favour of Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad as it is more convenient for the parties to produce their respective evident there. In this situation it can safely be held that to exercise power under section 38(7) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, second time in this case does not amount to review its previous order dated 9-8-1980 and there I B ample justification to transfer the case from Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore to Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad which is the original Court having territorial jurisdiction in the matter. I .
7. To avoid further delay the parties are directed to appear before Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad on 30-12-1980 and the said Labour Court is directed to dispose of the matter on or before 5-2-1981. Counsel for the petitioner-Bank undertakes to co-operate with the Court in disposing of the matter before the said date.