DECISION ' This Revision Application is directed against the order, dated 22-5-1990, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No, V at Karachi, whereby the Application under Order VII, Rule XI, C.P.C. Filed by the applicant was dismissed. The applicants pray that this Tribunal in exercise of its suo motu revisional powers may examine legality, propriety and correctness of said order and pass any suitable order.
2. I have heard Mr. M.L. Shahani, learned Advocate for the applicants and Mr. Ali Amjad, learned counsel for the respondents Nos, 3, 4 and 5.
3. It appears that General Body Meeting of Habib Bank Officers Welfare Association was held on 7- 3-1990 wherein it was resolved that the office-hearers, including respondents Nos, 3 to 5, who were elected as 'office-hearers' on 5-7-1987 were to continue as office-hearers for two more years. In the same meeting the 'Constitution of Association' was also amended whereby the Officers holding the rank of Vice-President were also allowed to be made members of the Association. The amendment in the Constitution as well as `Resolution' to continue previous office-hearers for two more years, was notified to the Registrar under section 8(4) of I.R.O., 1969, and the change of office-bearers has since been accepted by the Registrar. Respondents Nos, 3 to 5, however, filed application under section 8 (7) of I.R.O., 1969 before the learned Labour Court wherein it was prayed as under:- "It is therefore prayed that this Honourable Court may on hearing the parties set aside the proceedings and so-called decision of Gereral Body Meeting held on 7-3-1990 and to declare the same as unlawful and without any legal authority and to further order that the election of the Association for a period of two years be held in accordance with the original Constitution of the Association on the basis of membership of the Association as on 20-2-1990, under the supervision of Registrar; Trade Unions and to pass such further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case in the interest of proper function of the Association."
4. To appreciate the contentions of the parties it will he relevant to reproduce subsection (7) of section 8 of I.R.O., 1969, which reads as under:- "In case there is a dispute in relation to the change of officers of a trade union, or any trade union is aggrieved by the refusal of the Registrar under subsection (5), any officer or member of the trade union may apply or appeal to the Labour Court, who shall within seven days of receipt of the application or appeal, as the case may be, pass an order either directing the Registrar to register the change of alteration in the constitution or in the officers of the trade union or may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, direct the Registrar to hold fresh elections of the union under his supervision."
' On plain reading of this provision of the law it would be clear. That under this provision appeal or application is not provided where Registrar allows the amendment or alteration of Constitution of the Association. This subsection also does not provide any appeal or application where the change in office-bearers is not refused by the Registrar. However, if there is dispute with regard to change of office-bearers, the learned Labour Court can under this provision, for the reasons to he recorded direct the Registrar to hold fresh elections under his supervision. This view has been upheld by learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court in 1980 PLC 219, wherein it is held dispute in relation to change of officers of a Trade Union or refusal on the part of Registrar to register change under subsection (5) was held appealable, under subsection (7) of section 8. The same learned Single Judge also held the same view, in the case of Syed Muzaffar Hussain Shah v. Registrar Trade Unions, Rawalpindi 1980 PLC 219. In the case of Shamsur Rehman and another v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No,1, Karachi 1982 PLC 742 a learned Single Judge of Sindh High Court at Karachi held that dispute relating to change in office-bearers of Trade Union does not essentially cease to exist on registration of changes or alteration by Registrar.
5. The question as to whether there is dispute with regard to change of office-bearers or whether there are reasons, which may justify an order by the learned Labour Court to order fresh elections, can be decided only after evidence is recorded. Though under subsection (7) of section 8, the learned Labour Court does not have powers to order Registrar not to affect the alteration/amendment in the Constitution, nevertheless it has got powers to order fresh elections if it is satisfied that there is dispute over change of office-bearers and there are reasons to order that fresh elections should be held. The learned Labour Court can come to this conclusion only after recording of the evidence and as such it has rightly dismissed the application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. Which does not require any interference by this Tribunal in exercise of its suo motu revisional powers. Revision Application is dismissed.
Revision .