ORDER This is an application for transfer of Application No. 3 of 1973, pending before the learned Presiding Officer of Sind Labour Court No. III, Karachi, to some other Labour Court. The said application is for permission to dismiss the applicant from service. The applicant took certain preliminary legal objections about the maintainability of the application. Arguments were heard by the leamed Labour Court and the same had been disposed of on 8th May 1973, without giving any reason.
2. The first ground for transfer of the application is that the leamed Labour Court dismissed the legal objections raised by the applicant without giving any reason. This has given rise to an apprehension in the mind of the applicant, it is contended, that he will not get justice from the Court. The second ground for transfer is that the Presiding Officer was on friendly terms with Mr. Nasrullah, Representative of the Management The third ground was that the Presiding Officer was not favourably disposed towards Mr. A. Majeed, who is the Representative of the applicant. A copy of the application was sent to the Presiding Officer for his remarks. The learned Labour Court has offered his comments. About the legal objection of the applicant, the learned Labour Court in his remarks has stated as under:-- "There is no prejudice either, as the legal points have been allowed to be raised as of right at the time of final arguments/' 4. noti final-4 It appears to me after this remark that the applicant has been debarred from re-agitating his legal objection at the time of arguments. He cannot, therefore, he said to have been prejudiced. | 5. So far as the friendship with Mr. Nasrullah is concerned, it has been denied by the learned Labour Court. I accept the statement of the learned Labour Court on this point. Mr. Majeed also, after going through the remark cf the Court, did not press this point.
6. The submission that the learned Labour Court is not favourably inclined towards Mr. A. Majeed, it appears from the remark of the learned Labour Court, that there is some basis for this belief. The question, however, is as to whether this should be a ground for transfer of a case from one Court to another. It appears from the remark of the leamed Labour Court that Mr. Majeed had created such a situation that the Court took exception to his conduct. In matters of transfer where allegations are made against the Courts, the usual prcatice is that the remarks of the Courts are accepted. While disposing of this point, I would only observe that justice should not only be done, but it should seem to be done. The Court must B conduct itself in such a way that it inspires confidence in the litigants. This ; can be achieved only by courteous behaviour, patient and sympathetic . hearing. A Labour Court has to deal mostly on one side with illiterate persons. They should not expect the same courtesy from them as froml literate persons. A few minutes more time, courtesy and patient hearing! on the part of the Court would satisfy almost every litigant.
7. As the learned Labour Court has denied all the allegations made in the application for transfer, I am inclined to dismiss tbe application, but II would observe that the Court must maintain the high traditions of judiciary.p The applicant should not be made to feel that he had made an application' for transfer of his case from his Court. With these observations, I would dismiss the application.