' This is a revision challenging the order dated 11-1-1988 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 2, Lahore, whereby the complaint brought by the petitioner under section 25-A(8) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 has been dismissed for want of jurisdiction. .
2. The facts are that the petitioner brought an application to the National Industrial Relations Commission (hereinafter called as the N.I.R.C.) in which a stay order was issued by the N.I.R.C. The said case was, thereafter, transferred to the learned Labour Court No, 2, Lahore. It was alleged that in the pendency of the case before the learned Labour Court, the stay order issued by the N.I.R.C.
Had been violated and for this reason complaint under section 25-A(8) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was brought.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the respondent as it was argued before the learned lower Court that the N.I.R.C. Has jurisdiction to issue stay order under section 22-C of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 which powers have not been given to the Labour Courts, therefore, the stay order, for the non-compliance of which the complaint was brought by the petitioner, will be deemed to have been issued under section 22-C, therefore, the N.I.R.C. And not the Labour Court was competent to take action. Section 22-C does not authorise the N.I.R.C. To issue stay orders but rather it empowers the N.I.R.C. To punish any person who obstructs or abuses its orders or disobeys any of its orders or directions. Learned counsel for the respondent has not been able to point out any section which may have authorized the N.I.R.C. To issue stay orders.
Section 22- A(8)(g) authorizes the N.I.R.C. To deal with cases of unfair labour practice in the manner laid down under section 25-A or section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 or in such other way as may be prescribed. Thus the stay orders issued by the N.I.R.C. Are akin to the stay orders issued by the Labour Courts hearing petitions under section 25-A or section 34.
Needless to say that in the N.I.R.C. Petition under section 25-A was brought, which was transferred to Labour Court No, 2, Lahore. It goes without saying that a transferee Court can take action for the non-compliance of an order passed by the previous Court, because such orders are deemed to have been passed by the transferee Court. If the case had remained pending before the N.I.R.C., then only the N.I.R.C. Would have been competent to take action under section 22-C for the violation of the stay order issued by it but after the case was transferred to the Labour Court, the latter became competent to take action for the violation of any order issued by the N.I.R.C. Of course, if the N.I.R.C. Had been authorised by any other such section to issue stay orders which does not authorise the Labour Courts to pass such an order, only the N.I.R.C. Would have been competent to take action for the violation of the orders passed by it. I, therefore, do not find any force in the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction, to take notice of the alleged violation of the stay order issued by the N.I.R.C. The learned lower Court has not given any other reason for holding that it is not competent to hear the contempt petition.
4. However, the petitioner could not bring the complaint himself as section 25-A(8)(a) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 is not applicable. The said clause applies if a period is fixed for doing an act and compliance is not made within the said period. Prima facie clause (b) of section 25-A(8) applies which authorizes only the Court to bring the complaint, violation of whose order is complained of. The petitioner, therefore, could ask the Labour Court to bring a complaint and neither the petitioner could make the complaint, nor the Labour Court is competent to hear it itself.
So the order of the Labour Court that it has no jurisdiction is correct but the grounds given are wrong.
5. As a result of what has been said above, the revision fails and is dismissed.