' This petition under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenges the decision dated 5th September, 1980 of the 8th Additional District Judge, Karachi, allowing Civil Appeal No, 516 of 1982.
' The facts leading to the filing of the petition are as under :-
1. Petitioner No, 1 is the President of the United Bank Labour Union Karchi (hereinafter referred to as the Union) which is a registered Trade Union of workers employed in the United Bank Limited and is declared Collective Bargaining Agent under section 22 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the I. R.
0.). Petitioner No, 2 is Senior Joint Secretary of the Union. It is admitted fact that respondent No, 1 was the General Secretary of the Union on 11th May, 1982. It is however, the case of the petitioners that on that day he tendered resignation which was initially accepted by the Managing Committee of the Union and Petitioner No, 2 was nominated to act as General secretary. The change was submitted to respondent No, 2 who by his letter dated 22nd June, 1982 addressed to the petitioners informed that the vacancy due to resignation of the General Secretary had not been filled in accordance with clause 8 (e) of the Constitution of the Union as the General Elections of the Union were not due within two months from the date of the occurrence of the vacancy and Bye-election should, therefore, be held as provided in clause 13 (h) of the aforesaid Constitution. He, therefore, directed holding of Bye-election.
2. The respondent No, 1 filed appeal against the aforesaid order in the letter of respondent No, 2, before the First Labour Court, Karachi, under section 8 (7) of the I. R.
0. And that Court by its order dated 18th July, 1982 stayed the holding of Bye-election and also restrained respondent No, 1 from acting as General Secretary. It was observed that no finding at that stage could be given as the genuineness or otherwise of the resignation but the question could be decided after recording evidence. The matter was fixed for evidence on 5th August, 1982.
Respondent No, 1 however, withdrew the proceeding and filed a civil suit in the Court of the 16th Civil Judge, Karachi for declaration, injunction and cancellation of the documents of resignation. The petitioners who were shown as defendants alongwith the Registrar of the Trade Unions, in the plaint, filed an application under Order 7, rule 11, C.P.C. Praying for rejection/return of the plaint for presentation before proper Court. The 16th Senior Civil Judge vide his order dated 18th September, 1982 rejected the plaint for the reason that according to him the Civil Court had no jurisdiction as the Labour Court which was the proper Court was approached first and the case came within the purview of section 8 (7) of the I. R.
0.
3. Respondent No, I filed appeal against the aforementioned judgment dated 18th September, 1982 passed by the learned 16th Senior Civil Judge, Karachi rejecting the plaint under Order 7, rule 11, C. P.
C. In the suit for declaration, cancellation of documents and permanent injunction filed by him. The same was heard by the learned 8th Additional District Judge, Karachi who by his judgment dated 5th October, 1982 allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 18th September, 1982 of rejection of plaint and remanded the suit for trial and adjudication of the matter on merits. He also granted temporary injunction restraining the respondents (petitioners in the instant revision application) and the Registrar, Trade Union or any person acting on their behalf from preventing respondent No, 1 from holding the post of General Secretary of the Union and from interfering with his official status. Petitioner No, 2 was further restrained from acting as the General Secretary of the Union. Against this decision of the learned 8th Additional District Judge, Karachi, the instant revision application has been filed.
4. I have heard the arguments of Mr. M. L. Shahani, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Raja Qureshi, the learned counsel for the respondent No,
1. The only point of substance is whether the A Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain and decide the civil suit filed by respondent No, I, in view of provisions of section 8 (7) of the I. R.
0. The aforesaid provision reads as under : "(7) In case there is a dispute in relation to the change of officers of a Trade Union, or any Trade Union is aggrieved by the refusal of the Registrar under subsection (5), any officer or member of the Trade Union may appeal to the Labour Court, who shall within seven days of the receipt of application or appeal, as the case may be, pass an order either directing the Registrar to register the change or alteration in the Constitution or any officer of the Trade Union or may, for reason to be recorded in writing, direct the Registrar to hold fresh election of the Union under his supervision."
It is true that it is the case of respondent No, 1 that he never resigned as General Secretary of the Union on 11th May, 1982 and that the resignation had been forged and did not bear his signature, however, as is apparent from reading of the pleadings on record the dispute was whether he continues to be the General Secretary of the Union or he had been ceased to be so.
5. A perusal of the plaint filed in the Court of 16th Senior Civil Judge, Karachi would show that he had mentioned his entire version about his case of continuing to be the General Secretary of the Union and the prayer in the suit was not only with regard to cancellation of documents of his resigation but the declaration that he still lawfully holds the post of the General Secretary of the Union for the years 1982-83 and 1983-84. He also prayed that the order of the Registrar dated 22nd June, 1982 be declared void and without jurisdiction and he further prayed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants or any body acting on their behalf from preventing him from holding the post of the General Secretary of the Union and from interfering with his official function.
He also prayed for injunction against defendant No, 2 (Petitioner No, 2 herein) from acting as the General Secretary of the Union. A perusal of the prayer clause even indicates that the real dispute is with regard to the fact whether respondent No, 1 continued to be the General Secretary of the Union or not. The dispute, therefore, undoubtedly is in relation to the change of officers of the Trade Union as envisaged in subsection (7) of section 8 of its I. R.
0.
6. The very fact that in the impugned order of the learned 8th Additional District Judge, Karachi, injunction was issued against the petitioners preventing them from interfering with the performance of functions as General Secretary of the Union by respondent No, 1, shows that the dispute was with regard to the change of officers of the Trade Union and therefore, the action taken by respondent No, 1 in filing appeal against the order of the Registrar, Trade Unions before the Labour Court was legal and proper. It is the case of respondent No, that he was advised that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to declare the resignation to be forged and void but as the interim order of the First Labour Court dated 18th July, 1982 would show the question had been deferred for decision after recording of evidence. A Labour Court established by the Provincial Government under section 35 of the 1. R.
0. Under subsection (5) (d) thereof shall exercise and perform such powers and functions as are or may be conferred upon or assigned to it by or under the I. R.
0. Or any other law and section 36, subsection (2) provides that the Labour Court for the purpose of adjudicating and determining any industrial dispute is to be deemed to be a Civil Court and shall have the same powers as are vested for the purpose under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The examination and appreciation of evidence produced before it is within its powers specially for the purposes of settlement or adjudication of an industrial dispute as defined in section 2 (xiii) of the I.
R.
0. Prima facie the dispute in question is between one work-managed and another and a fair reading of section 8(7) of the I. R.
0. Shows that an appeal is provided both in case of a dispute in relation to change of officers of a Trade Union or refusal on the part of the Registrar to register change under section 8 (5). It is evident from the record that having rightly filed appeal before the Labour Court No, 1, the respondent No, considered it expedient not to proceed with the same as the interim order already passed was against him. Under the circumstances stated the decision given by the learned 16th Senior Civil Judge, Karachi, was set aside by the 8th Additional District Judge, Karachi for the reasons which cannot be accepted as legal or proper, the Revision Application is accordingly allowed and the impugned order of the 8th Additional District Judge, Karachi dated 5th October, 1982 is set aside. In the circumstances of the case no orders are passed with regard to cost.