By the present order are proposed to be disposed of as many as ten Appeals (Nos. 447/93 to 456/93), captioned above, all having been filed on 2-10-1993, against erstwhile employees of Bambino Food Industries (Pvt.) Limited, Jampur Road, Dera Ghazi Khan, whose reinstatement in service has been ordered by the learned Punjab Labour Court No. 9, Multan, by a consolidated judgment rendered on 14-9-1993.
2. As employees of the appellant establishment, the respondents before this Court, petitioners before the Labour Court, pleaded having acquired status of permanent workmen, but were allegedly victimised for their trade union activities and ousted from service by verbal orders conveyed on 2-11-1992; when they were just not allowed to enter the interior of the factory, by being stopped at the gate. They were not even paid wages for the preceding month i.e. October, 1992, and through members of the employers' ' pocket. Union' were falsely involved in a criminal case under section 419/468/471, P.P.C., registered at P.S. Choti (District Dera Ghazi Khan). Alteration or disappearance of service record of the respondents was allegedly also caused in an ulterior, mala fide and dishonest manner, to deal a damaging blow to their cause, with a view to disentitle them to seek the requisite relief from the Labour Court. Through its influence, the establishment also managed rejection of request of their union by the Registrar, Trade Unions, Dera Ghazi Khan.
3. Learned lower Court has discussed the evidentiary material on record and reached the conclusion that the orders of termination of services of the respondents being invalid and inoperative could not be permitted to remain intact. The orders were set aside and a direction was made that the respondents be taken back in service within 15 days of announcement of the judgment.
4. I would not go into further details, lest an elaborate appraisal and even mention of the facts may amount to an expression of opinion that may prejudice the case of either party to the litigation.
Learned counsel for the appellant, at the outset of their arguments, have drawn the attention of the Court to the rule of law laid down in its illustrious ruling by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, in the case, Noor Elahi v. The State and others, reported as PLD 1966 SC 708, proclaiming that as a general rule, evidence and findings recorded in a particular case should not be allowed to affect the decision, even the course of the proceedings of another case, since evidence recorded in one case cannot be read as legally acceptable evidence in another case, and proceedings would stand vitiated, if such a course is adopted. These observations have been made at page. 713, by an honourable Judge of the Bench, Mr. Justice B.Z. Kaikaus.
5. The learned counsel representing the employer have pointed out that statement of only one person, that of the petitioner himself, has been recorded as P.W. 1, and similar is the position of the evidence of the respondents before the Labour Court, comprising statements of the General Manager and the Manager Administration, recorded as R.Ws. 1 and 2. The aforesaid statements have been copied and carried in all the cases, word by word, although every employee has a case of his own, and it may be dissimilar to the case of a colleague. This wholesale transplantation of the evidence, in all these cases, entailing writing of one and the same judgment in every case, will render the proceedings as invalid and devoid of all legal sanctity, in the strict sense of the term.
6. I have noted another important feature, while going through the judgment, in the last but one paragraph of which it has been remarked by the learned Presiding Officer that the law requires that the best available evidence be produced in Court, and if in a case the same is lacking, adverse presumption may be raised against the cause of the party concerned, and the Court itself should not strive to fill in the lacunae. It is added that production of evidence by an order of the Court may result in prolongation of the litigation. I would observe that such a desire or effort on the part of the Court is legally permissible, and incidence of mere delay in the disposal of the matter should not stand in the way of the Court, which must see to it that complete justice is done, as ultimate object of machinery of Courts is to administer justice. If the employer did not produce service record of the employees, and the Court found itself to be handicapped in arriving at a correct conclusion, the employer could very well be asked to tender the same in the Court, so that it could be perused, and on the basis thereof the rival stand-points of the parties could be examined and determined in a satisfactory manner. Withholding of important and relevant record by the establishment could be taken as an endeavour on its part to prevent the Court from reaching just conclusions and in such a situation the Court must not find itself to be helpless.
7. For the aforesaid technical lapse, attending the Court proceedings, I would set aside the impugned judgments, delivered by the Labour Court, and remand the cases for their decision afresh in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above. Since the same Court, which has written an elaborate decision, may find itself embarrassed, while undertaking the entire exercise afresh, and as on behalf of the appellants lack of trust has also been shown, I would entrust the cases to Punjab Labour Court No. 8, at Bahawalpur, with a direction that the matters, which have been pending over a long the, shall be disposed of finally, at the earliest, by giving adjournments of shortest possible duration and by avoiding all unnecessary adjournments. The records shall be remitted to the transferee Court, without delay. There shall be no order as to costs.