DECISION ' This judgment will dispose of Appeal No. KAR-353/77 wherein the sole point for determination is whether the Karachi Club is or is not the Employer of the appellant Mr. Mohammad Farooque Khan who was working as an Accounts Clerk in this Club and was dismissed from service. After the usual Grievance Notice, the appellant filed his application under Section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 in the Court of Mr. Iqbal Ahmad Baloch, Presiding Officer, Sind Labour Court No. V, Karachi, who without going into the merits of the case dismissed this application for the reason that it was not maintainable against the respondent Club which Club in the opinion of the Court below was not the appellant's Employer.
2. In deciding this short point, I have had the assistance of Mr. Mirza Mohammad Kazim appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Sher Afgan appearing on behalf of the respondent Club. At the end of their arguments I reached the conclusion that the Karachi Club is the Employer of the appellant and consequently this case must be remanded to the Lower Court for trial on its merits and I announced this Decision in Court. This judgment contains the reasons for this Decision.
3. To begin with, the words "Commercial Establishment" are defined in section 2(b) of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, as including a Club, Hotel, a Restaurant or an Eating House. Thus, the Karachi Club is an Establishment within the ambit of this definition and it consists of a body of persons assembled together under a regular Constitution which provides for a Managing Committee and office-bearers such as President, Secretary, Treasurer etc. The work of this Club is carried on by a staff who though engaged by the Managing Committee or one of its Officers are really the employees of the Club itself. It seems to me that whereas the Club is a fictional institution it has as opposed to it in the world of reality persons who act on behalf of it and therefore, whose acts are attributable to the Club. Section 2(c) of the same West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, defines the term 'Employer' as meaning the owner of an Industrial or Commercial Establishment to which this Ordinance for the time being applies. From what has been said above it would follow that the Club though a fictional entity is the real owner operating through its Agents such as its Officers and its Managing Committee.
4. Again, Subsection (8) of section 2 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, defines an "Employer" as meaning in relation to an Establishment any person or body of persons whether incorporated or not who or which employs workmen in the Establishment under a contract of employment and includes (b) any person responsible for the Management, supervision and control of the establishment. It is true that in this case as pointed out by the Presiding Officer of the Court below in his impugned Order that "the Applicant made no efforts to amend his application so as to make the 'Employer' responsible in this case." But, it seems to me that this omission on the part of the applicant to include the name of the Secretary to the Club or any other officer cannot detract from the position that these persons are only Agents acting on behalf of their principal, namely the Karachi Club itself. It is pointed out by Mr. Sher Afgan that the Karachi Club is a mere trade which cannot enter into a contract it has no legal entity. However, as mentioned-above, although the Club as such is a fictional institution yet it has for its Agents in the world of reality persons who act on its behalf and whose acts are attributable and relate back to the Club itself.
5. In this view, then, I hold that the Karachi Club is the Employer of the applicant/appellant and I remand this case back to the trial Court for a decision on merits.