The revision petition is directed against an order dated 22-1-1996, rendered by Punjab Labour Court No. 9, Multan, rejecting an application submitted by the Civil Aviation Authority through its Acting Airport Manager, Multan Airport, seeking dismissal of the grievance petition, filed by one Zamir Alam, under section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Challenging his removal from service.
2. Revision petitioner's plea is that the Airport Development Authority has been merged in the Civil Aviation Authority, which is a body corporate, and can sue and be sued in its corporate name, and the grievance petition, by not taking care of this aspect of the matter, must be taken to be suffering from mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties. In particular, reference has been invited to section 23 of the Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority Ordinance, 1982, which contemplates complete ouster of jurisdiction of Labour Courts and excludes applicability of provisions of the Labour Laws to the cases relating to the Authority and its employees.
3. Learned Labour Court, it is urged, has misconstrued the provisions, and in its usual zeal to come to the rescue of an employee, has mis--interpreted the case-law on the subject. This Tribunal had delivered a judgment on 14-3-1987 in Revision Petition No. RI-628 of 1986-Punjab, with the title 'Civil Aviation Authority etc. v. Muhammad Hanif etc.', and had declared that jurisdiction of Labour Courts was barred by virtue of section 23 of the Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority Ordinance, in so far as the provisions of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 were concerned. In the opinion of the learned Labour Court, the judgment is not applicable, as it was question of issuance of temporary injunction against an order of transfer in that case, and the provisions of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 had not come under consideration. According to the Court below, the employee's case is covered by the provisions of Standing Order 15(3), and he is entitled to seek relief from the Labour Court. In the same judgment, my learned predecessor, however, had observed, and rightly so, that the question was of forum and not of form of the relief being claimed. Temporary injunction may be granted or refused by a Court only when it is competent to deal with the main matter, as obviously the question of ad interim injunction has not to be attended to in an isolated manner, detached and divorced from the main case, and competence of a Court cannot be said to be available as regards a part of the relief and not respecting the remaining part.
4. Learned counsel for the revision-petitioner is also not incorrect in arguing that Labour Courts are the creation of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969; and if provisions of the said Ordinance, by virtue of another. Enactment, are rendered nugatory, it will lead to anomaly and absurdity. Again it will be a travesty of argument, if it is contended that applicability of the provisions of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 is not precluded and Labour Courts can deal with the cases stated to be falling under the latter Ordinance, even though the cases being covered by the provisions of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 have been specifically excluded from the domain of the Labour Courts.
5. It has, in express terms, been held in PLD 1976 Lahore 1097, K.G. Old v. Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court, and 1993 SCM R 837, Haji Malik Awan v. Federation of Pakistan, that Civil Aviation Authority is neither an industrial nor a commercial organisation and its employees, therefore, would not be eligible to approach a Labour Court for redressal of their grievances. The Civil Aviation Authority, it is so well-known, is working under the control and authority of the Federal Government.
Services and installations of an organisation, connected with and incidental to the Armed Forces or Defence Services of the country, would be immune from B applicability of the Labour Laws, by virtue of section 1(3)(a), Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Again, as the Authority has its own statutory rules of service, the Civil Aviation Rules, 1978, the provisions of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 would also not be attracted, as postulated by section 1(4)(c) of the said Ordinance. The learned lower Court has gone to far in adopting the view that it would be a matter of evidence, and unless the parties lead evidence, it cannot conclusively be said that the provisions of the Ordinance of 1968 even have no application.
6. The 'maintenance work', which was being executed by the Airport Development Authority, had been taken over by the Civil Aviation Authority, with effect from 1-7-1983, and necessary policy decisions had been taken. Further, the Airport Development Authority, against which body the respondent had his grievance, had been ordered to be wound up, and Mr. Raees M. Irshad had been appointed as the Liquidator, and following that important development, no Court could exercise jurisdiction in regard to the affairs of the Agency/Authority, as all claims could only be laid before the Liquidator. Zamir Alam's petition under section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was thus not maintainable, and was liable to rejection, as such. In erroneously assuming jurisdiction in the matter, the learned Labour Court has certainly travelled beyond its frontiers and has acted illegally and with material irregularity, warranting interference with the impugned order by this Court, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. It was particularly so, as this Tribunal, as also the Honourable High Court, had earlier declined to concede to the employee not only the relief asked for, but even its forum for the requisite relief.
7. For what has been said above, it would be difficult to uphold the verdict rendered by the learned Labour Court. The same is set aside, on acceptance of the present revision petition, although with no order as to costs.