This is an appeal under section 16 of the West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1968, filed by the Cooper & Company Employees' Union, against Messrs Cooper & Company Limited, Karachi. The appellants gave a notice of strike, which resulted in the Failure Certificate issued in September 1967.
An application under section 5(5) of the Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1959 (hereinafter called the repealed Ordinance), was presented in the Second West Pakistan Industrial Court, Karachi, on 25th October 1967. A number of demands, were made through the application under section 5(5) of the repealed Ordinance. The main demand was about the re-instatement of 18 of the workmen of the Company with all back benefits and wages. The learned Chairman of the Industrial Court came to the conclusion that the 18 workmen were dismissed for mis--conduct. Thereafter; they could not be re-instated.
2. It is said that on 1st August 1967, 22 employees, including the 18 workmen, addressed a letter to Mr. P. M. Cotton, at Representative of Messrs American President Lines Limited, who happened to be in Karachi at that time. The American President Lines Limited were the principles of the respondent.
Company. The twenty-two employees of the Company Complained to Mr. Cotton against the conduct of Mr. S. C. Subjally, General Manager and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the respondent-Company. According to the Board of Directors the allegations were dishonest, reckless and malicious. Mr. Subjally called the workers and asked them to withdraw the letter and apologize.
The workers by their letter dated 23rd August 1967, reiterated the contents of their earlier letter and forwarded a copy of the same to Mr. Cotton. The Company issued charge-sheets 'to the 18 workmen along with others. The eighteen workmen, instead of giving any, explanation, reiterated the contents of the earlier letter. There upon, the General Manager and the Chairman of the Board of Directors terminated their services on 30th. August 1967.
3. It is unnecessary to dilate on the question whether the 18 workmen had committed misconduct or not. The letter terminating the employment of the 18 persons clearly explains the, position of the misconduct of the 18 workmen. It runs as 1` under:-- "We are in receipt of the explanation to the show-cause notice dated 28th August 1967. It has been noticed that you have given explanation jointly with all other persons who had been similarly charge-sheeted.
The Board of Directors have considered your explanation. It is regretted that you have not only made false and baseless allegations against the General Manager of the Company but are rearming your earlier action of unauthorised interfering in the Company's business. In fact, by writing the undated letter to Mr: P. M. Cotton and forwarding to him the copy of the letter dated 23rd August 1967, you gave the, Company untold harm inasmuch as Messrs American President Lines have terminated their contract with the Company.
It is now further noticed that your explanation which contains false, malicious and in so far as you are concerned also wholly irrelevant allegations against the General .Manager has been sent not only to Mr. P. M. Cotton but also to His Excellency the Governor of West Pakistan, The Governor, State Bank of Pakistan, and the Commissioner of Karachi.
It is therefore obvious that you are bent upon damaging the business and reputation of the Company and you have left the Company with no other alternative but to dismiss you from service.
You are therefore hereby informed that you are dismissed for misconduct from the Service of the Company with, immediate effect. You may please collect your wages for the month 'of August 1967 from the office. In so far as your provident fund account is concerned the same is being prepared and your dues will be sent to you at an address to be given by you today when collecting your salary.
(Sd.) S. C. SUBJALLY, General Manager, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Cooper & Co. Limited:'
4. I have gone through the letters of the workmen addressed to Mr. Cotton. They do not relate, in any way, to the grievances 'of the workmen as such. They relate to the personal conduct of Mr. Subjally. The workmen acted in an irresponsible way in lodging protest against the conduct of Mr. Subjally to Mr. Cotton and sending copies thereof to her authorities. The learned Chairman of the Industrial Court rightly came to the conclusion as a result of the contents of their letters addressed by the employees to Mr. Cotton that the workmen were guilty of misconduct. The only question was as to whether the 18 workmen had committed misconduct or not. I am clearly of the view that the sand taken by the Workmen against the Company clearly amounts to misconduct.
5. I had postponed the delivery of the order for giving an opportunity to the Company to forgive the conduct of the 18 workmen. I had appealed to Mr. Subjally to consider the past services of the 18 workmen, who had served the Company for very long time and not to dismiss them, if possible. It was stated on behalf of Mr. Subjally that it was not possible to pardon the 18 workmen. I cannot legally force the Chairman of the Board of Directors to accept the 18 workmen in Service.
6. With these observations I dismiss the appeal. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.