' The petitioner Union throws challenge to the order, dated 12-12-1998 issued by Registrar of Trade Unions, respondent No,1, by which order the Registrar proposes to hold referendum to determine the Collective Bargaining Agents for the Lahore Circle of Allied Bank of Pakistan Limited. The impugned order records that earlier the injunction order was issued by learned Member, National Industrial Relations Commission, (hereinafter referred to as NIRC) on 2-12-1998, which stands recalled, hence there is no hitch in holding the referendum.
2. It is asserted that the petitioner is a Union of the Bank Employees Registered at national level, it has its membership within the Lahore Circle and consequently notice to participate in the referendum ought to have been issued to the petitioner-Union also. It is prayed that because no such notice has been issued, the proposed holding of referendum by the Registrar is without legal authority.
3. In its comments, respondent No,1 has stated that in the Lahore Circle only two Unions are registered who are respondents Nos,2 and 3 and notice was, therefore, issued to these respondents inviting them to participate in the referendum. It is claimed that the action of the respondent is absolutely covered by the letter of law. In its reply respondent No,2 has maintained that petitioner- Union cannot participate in the referendum because it has not been registered by respondent No,l.
It is stated that the petitioner-Union has been registered by N.I.R.C. At national level and as such is not entitled to participate in the referendum being held for determining the Collective Bargaining Agent for Lahore Circle of the Bank.
4. Initially this Court, while proceeding with the main petition restrained holding of elections.
However, subsequently, this order was modified and holding of election was permitted but it was directed that result of election will be subject to final decision of this Court. Respondent No,1 has filed a report stating that the elections were held on 22-5-1999 in which respondent No,2 has secured 256 votes as compared to 132 secured by respondent No,3.
5. Mr. M. Khalid Farooq, Advocate, has relied on section 22(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, to submit that once an application is received by Registrar under subsection (2), he has to, by notice in writing, call upon every registered trade union in the establishment or group of establishments to which the application relates, to indicate whether it desires to contest in the secret Ballot. His emphasis is that petitioner will be covered by the expression "every registered trade union".
6. On the other hand, Mr. Farooq Zaman Qureshi, Advocate, appearing for respondent No,2, has maintained that since the petitioner is a union registered by N.I.R.C. At the National Level, it cannot claim that the Registrar should invite the petitioner-Union under section 22(3) to indicate whether it wants to contest or not? The representative of the Registrar Trade Union has also supported the legal position that since the petitioner is not a union registered by Registrar, it cannot be permitted to participate in the referendum to be held by Registrar to determine the Collective Bargaining Agent of Lahore Circle.
7. The perusal of the relevant provisions shows that a clear distinction is being made between the trade unions operating at the National or at the Industrywise level and those whose activities are restricted to either smaller territories or a single establishment or a group of establisments. The former are registered by N.I.R.C. Under section 22-A(8)(d)(e), while the second category is registered by Registrar Trade Union in terms of sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Ordinance. When the Registrar is holding referendum, he is required to notify every registered trade union in the "establishment" or any "group of establishments". In subsection (2) of section 22, again expression used is "establishment" or "a group of establishments". The question, therefore, is whether the petitioner-Union registered at National Level is a union within the meaning of subsection (2) or subsection (3) of section 22 of the Ordinance.
8. The answer in my opinion has to be in the negative, in spite of the argument that the membership of the two unions or more than two unions may be common. In other words, the employees of the bank working at Lahore may become members of the union operating at local level as well as members of union operating at national level. However, this commonality alone will not entitle the union operating at national level to participate in the referendum to be held for determination of Collective Bargaining Agent for local or regional or circle level. In other words, the petitioner-Union cannot be held to be a Registered Trade Union in the "Establishments" or "Group of Establishment" located in the Lahore Circle of the Bank. This conclusion is confirmed by the fact that admittedly the unions operation at the national level or industrywise level are registered not by Registrar Trade Unions but by the N.I.R.C.
9. For the above reasons, I see no merit in this petition, which is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Registrar, respondent No,1, can proceed to notify the result.