This is a transfer application dated 13-7-1973 pending before the Punjab Labour Court, Central Zone, Lahore, to some other Labour Court.
2. The facts of the case are that one Muhammad Hussain, typist, Chemical Department, President, Hyesons Sugar Mills Employees' Trade Union, Jatha Bhutta, Khanpur, Bahawalpur Division, filed a petition under section 25-A read with section 15, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, before the Junior Labour Court, Rahimyar Khan, claiming that the General Manager of Messrs Hyesons Sugar Mills Limited be directed to release his increment said to be due on 4tb December, 1972. The General Manager of the Mill opposed that petition giving a detailed reply. The case carne up for hearing before the Junior Labour Court, Rahimyar Khan on 16-3-1973 and according to the 7tritioner in the present petition, the learned Presiding Officer of that Court treating the said petition as a case of criminal complaint for unfair labour practice expres--sed the opinion that the General Manager of the said Mill should be prosecut--ed. The petitioner, thereafter, moved the Punjab Labour Court, Central Zone, Lahore, for the transfer of the case from the Junior Labour Court, concerned to some other Junior Labour Court. The learned Presiding Officer of the Punjab Labour Court, Central Zone, Lahore, vide his order dated 22-3-1973, issued notice to the respondent, i. e., Rana Muhammad Hussain for arguments on 11-4-1973 at Multan. In the meanwhile he also stayed the proceedings pending in the Junior Labour Court. When the case came up for hearing before the Punjab Labour Court at Multan on 12-7-1973, the learned Presiding Officer of the said Court was informed by the parties that the Presiding Officer of the Junior Labour Court, Rahimyar Khan had already been transferred. Since the allegation was only against the Presiding Officer of the Junior Labour Court, the transfer application was rejected. On 14-7-1973, the representative of Hyesons Sugar Mills Limited, filed another application for the transfer of the case from the Junior Labour Court, Rahimyar Khan to another Junior Labour Court, functioning in any other district.
Simultaneously another application seeking interim relief to the following effect was moved:- "Under the circumstances it is humbly submitted that reasonable period of stay may kindly be granted to enable the petitioner to seek further stay from the Tribunal at Lahore and for transfer of the case from this Hon'ble Court to other Court."
Since the prayer was so ambiguous and unintelligible, learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court asked the representative Management to explain what relief he wa3 claiming through that application and the representative replied that the proceedings before the Junior Labour Court be stayed. The learned Labour Court refused to grant the stay as prayed for. He, however, stayed further proceedings in his Court ; because a prayer had been made that an application for the transfer of that application from that Court to some other Labour Court would be moved before this Tribunal.
3. Before dealing with the merits of this case, it may be pointed out that, this Tribunal has no power to transfer a case from one Junior Labour Court to another. It is only the Senior Labour Court, which has that power. I his is apparent from section 36-C (a) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 Under section 36-C (b), this Tribunal can only transfer any application A appeal or other proceeding pending before a Labour Court under its appellate jurisdiction to any other such Labour Court. In view of the above, this Tribunal has jurisdiction to transfer the application dated 13-7-1973 pending before the Punjab Labour Court, Central Zone, Lahore, to some other Labour Court.
4. The petitioner in paragraphs 14 and 15 of the application before this Tribunal bas made some allegations against the Punjab Labour Court, Central Zone, Lahore. Paragraph 14 reads as follows:- "that the transfer application moved by the petitioner came up for hearing before the learned Labour Court, Central Zone, Punjab. Camp at Multan, on 12th July, 1973, and respondent No. 1, without affording an opportunity of bearing to the petitioner disposed of the transfer application.
The prayer of the petitioner for transfer of the case was rejected."
Paragraph 15 reads as follows: "That the petitioner immediately filed another transfer application before respondent No. I on 14th July, 1973, on fresh grounds, but respondent No. 1, instead of treating the application on merits, started expressing its opinion in favour of respondent No. 3 and it was obvious from the attitude of respondent No. 1 that the said fresh petition would also be dismissed. Respondent No. 1 did not grant a stay order but fixed 19th July, 1973, for bearing of the said petition at Lahore. Respondent No. 1, however, advised the petitioners to move the Labour Appellate Tribunal in this respect as it appeared that respondent No. 1 was under considerable pressure from various sources in respect of the transfer applications moved by the petitioner."
5. The allegations contained in paragraph 14 appeared to be absolutely false, When the parties had informed the learned Labour Court that the Presiding Officer of the Junior Labour Court, Rahimyar Khan had already been transferred no further opportunity was required to dispose of that application because the allegations in that application were only made against the Presid-- ing Officer of that Junior Labour Court. That application, in my view, had become infructuous and was rightly dismissed as such. Similarly, the allega--tions contained in Paragraph 15 also appeared to be fale. It is unbelievable that the Presiding Officer of the Punjab Labour Court, Central Zone, Lahore, who is one of the senior Sessions Judges in the Punjab, would start expressing opinion in favour of any party appearing before him. In any case when an application for interim relief was tiled along with the second application for transfer the prayer as already mentioned above was so ambiguous and unintelligible that the learned Presiding Officer was justified in asking as to what relief was being claimed. I would have certainly taken some action against the petitioner for making such wild and false allegations against th presiding Officer of the Punjab Labour Court, Central Zone, Lahore, but for the fact that Cap. Mohammad Azhar, deponent of the affidavit filed in this Court alongwith the transfer application tendered unqualified apology no B further action is called for. He, however, argued that in view of the matte as it now stands the application in question pending in the Labour Court be transferred to some other Labour Court. I find no force in this contention because it will give a free licence to an unscruplous person to make false allegations against a Court in order to get his case transferred from there.
In the result, this application for transfer is dismissed in limine.