ORDER Heard Learned Advocate of the respondent Mr. Zuberi and Representative of the applicant- Union Mr. S. P. Lodhi.
2. This is an application under section 46-A (3) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 brought by Mr. S. P. Lodhi, General Secretary on behalf of applicants-Union against M/s. Sunshine Dairies Ltd. alleging that the General Manager of the respondent has locked the Milk Plant and turned out the applicant's workmen since 7th November 1972, without giving any legal notice and observing procedure under law. This application was filed before this Court on 5th December 1972.
3. On 6th December 1972, a report under section 47-A, I. R. O, 1969, from Deputy Director, Labour Welfare, Karachi was also received by this Court. It reads as under:-- "(1) The General Secretary of Sunshine Dairies Employees* Union made a complaint on 13th November 1972, that Sunshine Dairies Hajra Mansion, 17-Elphinstone Street, Saddar, Karachi have declared lock-out and they are not paid their wages for the months of September 1972 and October 1972. (2) On the receipt of the complaint of the Union, Mr. A. K. Rana, Labour Officer and Inspector of Factories under Payment of Wages Act, 1936, was deputed to visit the factory and asked the occupier to pay the wages of the workers, (attested copy of the report of the Labour Officer is enclosed). (3) Enquiries revealed that the workers were not paid their wages/salaries for the months of September and October 1972 and when they agitated and requested for the payment of their wages, the Management closed down the factory and did not pay the wages. (4) The Management did not give any notice to the workers to close down the factory nor termination letters were given to the wokers nor their legal dues were paid. (5) A joint meeting of the Management and the Union was called on 18th November 1972 (copy of which is enclosed herewith). (6) The Representative of the Management agreed that he would make the payment of the due wages on 22nd November 1972, and he alleged that as the wages were not paid the workers just stopped the work. (7) While the workers denied this statement. (8) Another meeting was fixed on 23rd November 1972, and in this meeting the General Manager of the Company informed that he had not power to make any commitment regarding the settlement of the dues of the workers nor he has any power to serve the termination letter (notices) to the workers. (9) He furnished his comments in writing on 23rd November 1972, which are also enclosed herewith. The Management is not ready to open the factory nor they are ready to settle the accounts of the workmen. The report is submitted to the Labour Court for necessary orders."
4. It is the case of applicant that the respondents have locked- out the Milk Plant while respondents take the plea that the workers struck work with effect from 7th November 1972. It has been argued by the learned Advocate for respondents that it is a case of strike but during the same breath he says that the respondent-Compay has gone in liquidation and closed the Plant. This argument itself suggests that the respondents have locked-out the Plant Except the solitary word of the respondent in their written objections, there is nothing on the record to suggest that it is a case of strike. No oral or documentary or any other evidence or proof has been led by the respondents to show that the applicants have gone on strike. The plea of the respondents appears to me palpably false and cooked up. I therefore discard it. On the other hand, the report of the Deputy Director, Labour Welfare clearly establishes that the Management have closed dovn the factory and did not give notice of lock-out to the workers. Admittedly notice was not given to the applicants. The respondents cannot lock-out the plant without giving statutory notice in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance. Sections 26(3) and 28 of the Ordinance contemplate a notice of lock-out. Without giving notice to the employees the action of the lock-out is not warranted by law. Notice is a must before locking out. The Management cannot deprive the workers of protection under sections 26, 28 and otherf/I provisions of the Ordinance. Under Labour Law, no employer shall close down the entire establishment without prior permission of the Labour Court No such application by the respondents has been moved till now.
5. I am satisfied that the report of Deputy Director, Labour Welfare, Karachi appears correct. Nothing has been brought on record to discredit or shake the report of the Deputy Director. Labour Courts cannot interfere with the report of the Deputy Director if given correct and without any irregularity in procedure. The respondents have not attacked the report in their written objections. I find that it is a clear case of illegal lock-out since 7th November 1972. I, therefore, uphold the report. I further order that lock-out be lifted within 7 days from the date of this Order. I further prohibit the removal of fixed assets of the establishment. It may be added here that the General Secretary of applicants-Union concedes in his arguments that wages for September and October 1972, have been paid to the workers in November 1972.