DECISION I wish to dispose of the appeals of Ghulam Shabbir Usmani and Amir Abdullah, both aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of the learned Sind Labour Court No.IV, Karachi, dated 6-2-1985. Since the facts and the circumstances of the appeals are analogou and similar to both the appellants, I wish to dispose of these appeals by this single decision.
2. The facts are that the appellants were initially employed by the respondent Organisation vide appointment letter, dated 9-5-1982 in the capacity of N.T. Driver on a temporary basis. The work and the efficiency of the appellants having been found up to the mark, therefore, the tenure of temporary employment was extended vide letter dated 7-2-1983, and ultimately his temporary appointment was confirmed and his employment/ status was re-adjusted vide letter, dated 4-6- 1983, as permanent N.T. Drivers. Their pay and allowances totaling Rs.1,104 per month in addition whereof they were entitled to Rs.70 per month by way of uniform maintenance allowances etc, in view of the nature of duties appellants are defined in the Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 and Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 and in view of the volume of employment and other relevant particulars, the respondent Organization is an industrial and commercial establishment to which all the relevant Labour Laws were applicable. That from the very inception the Management adopted a very harsh unreasonable and unbecoming attitude towards the workers and officers always treated them with a malicious vindictive and victimizing approach. In view of this attitude, the workers formed a union called "Shaheen Airport Service Employees Union" and this application for registration was received by the Registrar of Trade Unions on 14-12-1983. This union was ultimately registered on 11-1-1984. That the news of the formation of the Trade Union somehow came to the knowledge of the top Management of the respondent Organization. Immediately after filing the above said registration application, more precisely within half an hour thereof, the management was sought to be served with a self-contained and self-explanatory letter informing regarding the formation of the Trade Union as fully mentioned above and notifying the names of the office-bearers in terms of section 8-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 including the names of the 2 appellants. The management personnel stationed at Terminal No. 1 of the Karachi Airport to whom the said letter was sought to be served in presence of the witnesses, after reading the same and appreciating the consequences and effects refused to receive and acknowledge same and upon insistence on the part of the union despatched the said letter to the management immediately under registered A/D cover vide postal registration No. 89, dated 14-12-1983, which was duly received and acknowledged on 15-12-1983. That on 17-12-1983, at about 2-00 p.m., the appellant Ghulam Shabbir Usmani was summoned in the administration office, the alleged termination Letter bearing No.SF(PAP)00049/133/SAPS, dated 14-12-1983 was served upon him. The appellant also received a copy of it by post on 21-12-1983. So also, the appellant Amir Abdullah was summoned in the administration office on 17-12-1983 at 2-00 p.m. And a termination Letter No.SF(PAP)00049/ 077/SAPS, dated 17-12-1983 and it is alleged that was served upon him and he was abused, humiliated and insulted like anything. Now the contention of the appellants is that the termination of the facts that the same emanates from the malice and spirit of victimization on the part of the management and is directed to penalizing him for having formed the union and and is liable to be set aside. The fact being that the establishment cannot, in view of section 8-A, I.R.O.
1969, terminate the services, although the establishment, vide order of the Provincial Government, was entitled to get the exemption under Standing Orders 12 and 15 of the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968.
3. The appeals were argued by Mr. Junaid Farooqi, for the appellants, and Mr. Samiullah Khan for the respondent establishment. Mr. Farooqi has taken me through the affidavit of two appellants. He urges that the intimation was given on 14-12-1983 in respect of the formation of the trade union in the respondent establishment and its registration before the Registrar of Trade Unions. Then, half an hour of the said intimation, the establishment refused to acknowledge, therefore, they were compelled to send the intimation under registered A/D cover. Paragraph 10 of the affidavit of appellant, Ghulam Shabbir Usmani, is as under: - ---That immediately after filing the above said registration application (more precisely within half an hour thereof) the management was sought to be served with a self-contained and self- explanatory letter informing regarding the formation of the Trade Union as fully mentioned above and notifying the names of the office-bearers in terms of section 8-A of I.R.O. 1969, including my name as General Secretary of the Union. The management personnel stationed at Terminal No.1 of the Karachi Airport to whom the said letter was sought to be served in presence of the witnesses, after reading the same and appreciating its consequences and effects refused to receive and acknowledge the same and upon insistence on the part of the union they resorted to threat etc. Faced with the situation the union despatched the said letter to the management immediately under registered A/D cover vide postal registration No.89, dated 14-12-1983, which was duly received and acknowledged as on 15th December, 1983 vide A.D. Receipt in possession of the union which I shall bring and produce at the time of my cross-examination.--- After reading the paragraph, one can gather that the establishment had received the letter on 15- 12-1983, by registered post and they were in full knowledge of the registration of the union and the appellants, names were on record. This circumstance speaks that the establishment fully knew of the registration of the trade union in their establishment and they had apprehended that section 8-A, I.R.O. 1969, would be applicable. I have read the cross-examination of Ghulam Shabbir Usmani and the other appellant, nothing has been said. This is clear cut malicious attitude on the part of the respondent Establishment. Section 8-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 is clear and they cannot terminate their services when the respondent Establishment came to know about the proceeding of the registration of the trade union in their establishment. No matter even if the Government had exempted the establishment under Standing Orders 12 and 15 of the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968. They could not invoke these orders when registration proceedings were in progress. They cannot avail the E exemption under Standing Orders 12 and 15 of the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968, in view of section 8-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The management could not have terminated the services of the two drivers when proceedings were pending under section 8-A Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 whether the termination be a termination simplicitor or otherwise management could not have done legally.
4. What I believe from the set of the circumstances of these two appeals, the management establishment was malicious and they tried to hoodwink the provisions contained in section 8-A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, and taken a false shelter under Standing Orders 12I and 15 of the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968. Malicious act is a malicious. I, therefore, set aside the impugned orders in these two appeals and allow both these appeals by re-instating these two appellants with 20% (twenty per cent) back benefits forthwith.