These complaints under section 15(d)(i) read with section 53 of the I.R.O. Have been submitted against the General Manager Standard Steel Re-rolling Mills, Badami Bagh, Lahore. The complainants were employed with the respondent establishment as workmen and their services were terminated vide verbal order dated 15-4-1983. They have stated that in the month of January, 1983 the complainants wanted to form a union in the establishment and an application was submitted to the Registrar of Trade Unions, Lahore Region, Lahore on 7-4-1983. The union was registered on 11-4-1983. After the registration of the union the complainants approached the respondent for the implementation of various rights guaranteed to the workers under the various labour laws but the respondent did not pay any heed. The union continued to approach the respondent and the respondent thereupon started victimization and looked out 4 workers.
2. The complainants approached the Registrar of Trade Unions who issued a show-cause notice to the respondent. The Registrar of Trade Unions after refusal by the respondent to reinstate the workers, filed a complaint of unfair labour practice within the meaning of section 15 of I.R.O. Before the Punjab Labour Court Lahore. The case filed by the Registrar of Trade Unions before the Labour Court was fixed for hearing on 27-6-1983 but was dismissed for non prosecution. The Labour Court advised the complainants and his colleagues to move a petition under section 25-A and consequently the complainants served grievance notices upon the respondent on 13-8-1983. No reply was received to these notices. The Labour Court vide order dated 17-12-1983 consolidated all the petitions filed by the respondent in the Labour Appellate Tribunal which accepted the appeal on the ground that the Labour Court could not condone the delay in submission of the grievance notice. The order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal was challenged in a writ petition in the Lahore High Court which was dismissed on 1-12-1985.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at Lahore on 28-8-1986. I find that the petitioners were dismissed in 1983 and they filed a case of unfair labour practice before the Labour Court through the Registrar of Trade Unions under section 15 of the I.R.O. This case was not pursued by the Registrar or the complainants and was dismissed in default. It is possible that the Registrar did not consider it a fit case to pursue in the Labour Court as he did not make any application for restoration of the case or filed an appeal against dismissal in default.
4. The petitioners filed another case under section 25-A in t Labour Court. The Labour Court after recording the evidence a hearing the parties held that the petitioners were dismissed from service without observing necessary formalities and as such their termination was illegal. In this case as well, there was no finding of any act unfair labour practice on the part of the respondents. The respondent filed an appeal in the Labour Appellate Tribunal which was accepted the ground that the Labour Court could not condone the period limitation under section 25-A of the I.R.O. The appellants filed appeal against this decision in the High Court which was also dismisses
5. The complainants were dismissed about 3 years ago and they cannot come to the Commission now to make out a case of unfair labor practice. As a matter of fact their case of unfair labour practice w~ also taken up by the Registrar of Trade Unions with the Labour Court and was dismissed in default. The delay of 3 years in submission of complaint before the Commission is fatal and particularly in view of the fact that the complainants had exhausted similar remedies before the Labour Court, the Labour Appellate Tribunal and the High Court.
6. I do not find the Commission competent to deal with the case unfair labour practice filed after 3 years. The complaints are therefore dismissed and the files are consigned to record.