1. ORDER The President of the National Shipping Corporation (Workshop) Worker's Union had made an application under section 6 of the Essential Services (Maintenance) Act to the Director, Labour and Central Labour Commissioner, Karachi for directions on their Charter of Demands. Since the Essential Services Maintenance Rules were amended vid Interior Division's Notification No. S. R. O.
2. 1004 (l)-74, dated 22nd July 1974 to provide for the Chairman of the National Industrial Relations Commission to issue directions under section 6 of the Essential Services (Maintenance) Act, 1952 the case was accordingly transferred to the Commission. A copy of the reply statement filed by the respondents was handed over to the applicant on 8-10-1974 and statements of both the parties were recorded on 22-11-1974. The arguments were also heard on that date and the parties closed their case. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the National Shipping " Corporation dismissed 9 workers for allegedly taking part and inciting others to take part in an illegal strike in that organisation on 15-10-1973. The General Secretary of the Union stated that the Union had moved the Corporation for the re-instatement of these 9 workers but without any result. He alleged that the 9 workers had been dismissed for no rhyme or reason. He also stated that there is another Union in the NSC (Workshop) which was formed after his Union had been registered. He further stated that he had agreed that in future demands would be put up through the CBA i e. NSC Staff Union. He denied the charge of misconduct. The applicant also stated that the enquiry with regard to the 9 workers who had been dismissed was conducted by Mr. Javed Mansoor, Deputy Engineering Superintendent and that he had refused to participate in the enquiry because in a previous enquiry against the workers he (Mr. Javed Mansoor) had taken a perverse view. Mr. Ali Musa Kiani, President of the Union deposed that they had challenged the dismissal of 9 workers and that he and Mr. Sajid Javed had not participated in the enquiry on the ground that Mr. Javed Mansoor (Enquiry Officer) was biased. He also stated that the allegation against them was that they had taken part in an illegal strike. All that he could say was that he had been victimised because he was the President of the Union. He stated that in view of the increase in wages and other fringe benefits as amicably decided between the Management and the workers, he did not press Demand No. 2. He also deposed that Mr. Javed Mansoor had the reputation of being against the workers. The only question to be determined relates to the re-instatement of 9 Workers. Mr. Javed Mansoor, Manager (Stores) NSC who was the Enquiry Officer in this case stated that he held enquiry against the 9 employees and submitted a copy of the enquiry report. He further deposed that the General Secretary and the President of the Union did not participate in the enquiry and that they had submitted an application to the effect that they had no confidence in him. According to him this application was turned down by the Management. He stated that after recording evidence he arrived at the conclusion that 9 persons were responsible for creating disorder in the Workshop. He also stated that they were mainly responsible for inciting other workers to commence illegal strike and besides they had manhandled certain workers and officers who were not prepared to agree with them, 1975 Pak. Stanvac Peirolilm Project Employees' Union v. 523 Wasim A. Zubeki {Abdul Hamid Malik, Chairman) c' The General Secretary also pointed out that the Management had since re-instated Matloob Shah and Muqaddar Shah out of the 9 workers who were dismissed and that the cases of remaining 7 workers required directions. 4' The applicant have not adduced any evidence to rebut the allegation of illegal strike. The enquiry proceedings have also not been challenged in any manner whatsoever. There is abundant proof on record to show that they were responsible for an illegal strike in the Corporation on 15-10-1973. Even their 2 erstwhile colleagues in their letters of apology addressed to the Management have stated that they had called the strike due to the threats of the General Secretary and admitted their fault., The Management was therefore, justified in taking action against these Workers as required under Regulation 40 of the NSC (Workshop) Workers Service Regulations, 1972. I, however, do not find on record any appeal filed by the 7 Workers to the Managing Director as provided in Regulation 41 of the above said Regulations and any decision taken on such appeals by the A Managing Director, fn short, I find no cogent grounds to set aside the conclusions at which the Enquiry. Officer has arrived.
3. The application, therefore is dismissed.