The petitioner Union seeks a declaration to the effect that the referendum proceedings initiated upon the application of the respondent No, 2 Union by respondent No, 1 (RTU) are null, void, illegal and without jurisdiction with the direction to respondents Nos, 1, 2 and 3 not to (do) any act of unfair labour practice on their part, on the averments that the petitioner Union is a duly registered trade union with the Registrar of Trade Unions, Multan Region, Multan and it has been functioning as C.B.A. for the last six years in the mills of the management/respondent No, 3 and the petitioner union was also declared successful in the last referendum held on 15-2-1988 and a C.B.A. certificate was issued to it alongwith a covering letter, and that there are as many as 1,571 persons in toto, who have been employed in the Harappa Textile Mills Limited and in this respect the Personnel Manager of the respondent No,3 issued a certificate dated 21-2-1990; and that out of 1,571 persons employed in the Harappa Textile Mills Limited the petitioner union has got 1,229 members and has been receiving their monthly subscription through check of system under section 23 of I.R.O., 1969, from the respondent No,3 and the list of members of the petitioner union can be produced as and when required by the Commission which fact is very much in the knowledge of the respondent No, 3 and that apart from the petitioner Union the respondents Nos, 4 and 5 are also registered trade unions in the Harappa Textile Mills Limited and the respondent No,4 union had members to the tune of 170, while the respondent No,5 union has got 130 members, and in this way by calculating the total members of the petitioners union and respondents Nos,4 and 5 unions that comes to 1,529 workers; and that the respondent No, 2 union was formed with the active and full support of the respondent No,3 and in the abovesaid situation it is a mandatory requirement of the law that in the presence of two or more unions, if the new union is desired to be formed, the union should have not less than 1/5th membership of the total workmen employed in the establishment and the respondent No, 2 union showed false and bogus membership and through misrepresentation and fraud with the support of the respondent No,3 employer got it registered with the Registrar of Trade Unions/respondent No, 1 on 13-2-1990 and the respondent No, 2 union is not entitled for its registration under the law, because it has got less number of members than the requisite number of members under the law and the petitioner union has filed a writ petition in the Lahore High Court Multan Bench against the registration of the respondent No, 2 union, which is pending and sub judice and that as has been mentioned, the respondent No,3 is actually helping and supporting its pocket union, namely United Workers Union/respondent No, 2 and the respondent No, 2 is bent upon to get declared its pocket union as C.B.A. by exerting pressure and threats upon the workers and the petitioner union and that the petitioner union in fact refused to become puppet of the management/respondent No,3 and refused to play as desired and the respondent No, 3 has been victimising the office-bearers and active members of the petitioner Union and in order to get redress, the petitioner Union had to file a Case No, 4A (906)/89-L in this Commission on 16-10-1989 which is pending and ultimately was disposed of on 15-11-1989 having borne fruit; and that the petitioner Union has got a guaranteed and secured right under the law that union having membership to the extent of 1/3rd of the total members employed in the establishment could challenge its status by way of referendum and the respondent No,2 union has got less number of members required for its registration which is 1/5th but with the active and illegal support of the respondent No,3 it has filed an application before the respondent No,1 under section 22(2) ibid for holding referendum in the establishment by showing false memberhsip to the extent of 1/3rd of the total members of the workers employed in it and upon the aforementioned application the respondent No,1 issued notice dated 17-2-1990 to the petitioner Union and started proceedings for the secret ballot and in total disregard of the statutory provisions of section 22(2) of the said Ordinance, the application of the respondent No,2 union is not maintainable under the said section for lack of requisite membership and respondent No,3 has been supporting the respondent No,2 union and interfering in the referendum proceedings; and that the respondent No,2 union tried to get registration from the members of the petitioner-Union from its membership with the connivance of the respondent No,3 but could not succeed in achieving the said purpose and only five members of the petitioner union resigned from the membership and joined the respondent No, 2 union and they informed the respondent No,3 for not deducting their union subscription and accordingly the respondent No,3 passed order dated 3-3-1990 and it is to mention here that out of seven persons mentioned two were not already members of the petitioner Union.
2. Respondent No,2, has contested the petition as well as stay application on the question of jurisdiction and on merits while the respondents Nos, 1, 3 and 4 are ex parte and respondent No,5 has not filed any reply.
3. I have heard the arguments on both sides.
4. Section 22 of the I.R.O. lays down the procedure for certifying and determining of CBA. According to subsection (2) of the said section where there are more registered trade unions than one in an establishment, the Registrar shall upon an application made in this behalf by any such trade union which has as its members not less than 1/3rd of the total number of workmen employed in such establishment hold within fifteen days from the making of the application, a secret ballot to determine as to which one of such trade union shall be the Collective Bargaining Agent for the establishment. Subsection (3) of the said section lays down that upon receipt of an application under subsection (2) the Registrar shall, by notice in writing, call upon every registered trade union in the establishment to which the application relates:--
(a) To indicate whether it desires to be contestant in the secret ballot to be held for determining the CBA in relation to such establishment; and
(b) If it so desires, to submit to him within the time specified in the notice a list of its members showing, in respect of each member, his parentage, age, the section or department and the place in which he is employed, his Ticket No, and the date of his becoming member:-
5. Subsection (4) of the said section lays down that every employer shall:-
(a) On being so required by the Registrar, submit the list of all workmen employed in the establishment excluding those whose period of employment in the establishment is less than three months and showing in respect of each workman his parentage, age, the section or department and the place in which he is employed, his Ticket No, and the date of his employment in the establishment.
(b) provide such facilities for verification of the list by him and the trade unions as the Registrar may require.
6. Subsection (5) lays down that the Registrar shall after verification of the lists submitted by the trade unions, prepare list of voters in which shall be included the name of every workman whose period of employment, as computed in accordance with subsection (4) is not less than three months and who is a member of any of the contesting unions and shall at least four days prior to the date fixed for poll, send to each of the contesting trade unions a certified copy of the list of voters so prepared.
7. Subsection (6) lays down that every workman who is a member of any of the contesting trade unions and whose name appears in the list of voters prepared under subsection (5) shall be entitled to vote at the poll to determine the Collective Bargaining Agent.
8. To observe all these formalities of law is the function and the duty of the Registrar Trade Unions and its performance whether legal, illegal or irregular is not an act of unfair labour practice. It is an admitted fact that the Registrar Trade Unions, Multan Region has registered United Workers Union, Workers Union and Al-Sadaqat Employees Union in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under section 8(1) of the I.R.O. in the same manner and observing the same formalities as the petitioner Union was registered. In the present case the contest is that the members alleged and shown by the respondent No,2 Union are alleged and shown by the petitioner union as their members. The verification of the lists submitted by trade unions and preparation of a list of voters is the function of the Registrar under section 22(5) of the I.R.O. and to stop a functionary from performing his lawful duty or function will be an abuse of the process of this. Commission. From this angle of view this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition as well as stay application.
9. There is another angle and that is that even if it is taken for granted that the petitioner Union has got a right guaranteed under the Law to object (to) the registration or application of trade union who does not fulfil the requirement of minimum number of membership, the remedy lies before the learned Labour Court under section 34 of the I.R.O. and not before this Commission unless the trade union is an Industry-wise trade union registered with the NIRC.
10. The third angle of the case is as to whether the establishment respondent No,3 who provided or submitted the list of all workmen employed in the establishment to the Registrar on being so required has acted in an unfair manner. The answer again is that his action is strictly in accordance with law and does not amount to unfair labour practice and in this manner the petitioner union has no cause of action nor locus standi to come before this Commission.
11. The result is that the petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction with cost of Rs,500, to be paid by the petitioner Union to respondent No,2 who was the only contestant party. This being the result the interim relief application is also dismissed for the same reason but with no order as to costs.