' This is a petition under section 22-A(8)(g) of I.R.O., 1969 alongwith application under Regulation 32(2)(c) of N.I.R.C. (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973, supported by affidavit filed by Muhammad Rafique Qureshi, General Secretary, Super Biscuit Factory Mazdoor Union.
' Facts as stated in the petition are that the respondent-Establishment is not providing rights to the workers which they are entitled. Respondents are against trade union and if workers try to form a trade union, they terminate their services. It is stated that workers have formed a union on 12-2- 2001 by the name of Super Biscuit Factory Mazdoor Union, which was registered by the Registrar Trade Unions, Hyderabad Region on 22-2-2001. After registration of the union, the union tried to get C.B.A. Certificate and knowing this, respondent No,2 called Mr. Muhammad Rafique Qureshi, General Secretary of the Super. Biscuit Factory Mazdoor Union, in his office and threatened him that in case union if formed and registration is obtained factory will be closed and workers will be terminated. It is prayed that the respondents be restrained not to close down the factory without prior permission of Labour Court. Respondent be restrained not to pressurize to discontinue trade union activities and further the respondent be restrained from terminating office-bearers and members of the union and other workers. Muhammad Yousaf, Proprietor of Messrs Super Biscuit Factory filed comments with preliminary objections for the respondents that the petition has been filed by one Muhammad Rafique Qureshi in his personal capacity and he' has no locus standi to file this petition, as such the petition is not maintainable. It is stated that the respondent-Establishment is a proprietary concern and the petitioner has wrongly impleaded Haji Muhammad Idrees and Haji Muhammad Salim in the petition, petition also is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of sole Proprietor Muhammad Yousaf. No specific instance of unfair labour practice has been mentioned, as such provision of section 15 of I.R.O., 1969 are riot attracted. It is stated that the respondents were not aware of formation of trade union before 6-4-2001, when the answering respondent attended the joint meeting before the Deputy Director Labour (Conciliator, Hyderabad) in connection with closure of the factory for the reason beyond the control of the management. Respondent has already filed application under Standing Order 11-A of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 before the 6th Labour Court, Hyderabad. It is stated that .Due to acute financial difficulties and uncertainty of business out of 37 workers, 25 have voluntarily resigned from their services and collected their dues in the month of March, 2001 and only 12 workers remained on the role of factory. It is stated that the respondents have not received interim prohibitory order before 6-4-2001, and were informed on the said date before the Deputy Director Labour (Conciliation), Hyderabad. Respondent, therefore, appeared on 21-4-2001 to explain the entire position. Respondent has not 'committed any victimisation and act of unfair labour practice. The answering respondent also denied other allegations of the petitioner by making specific and categorical denial.
2. I have heard Mr. Rana Mehmood Ali Khan, Representative for the petitioner and have gone through written arguments filed by Mr. Mehboob Rizvi, learned Advocate for the respondents.
3. Rana Mehmood Ali learned Representative for the petitioner has contended that the workers in the respondents-Establishment had formed union on 12-2-2001, which was registered on 22-2- 2001. He contended that on 10-3-2001 respondent No,2 called Muhammad Rafique Qureshi, General Secretary of the Union and threatened him that in case union is formed and registration is obtained, factory will he closed down and workers will be terminated. This petition, therefore, was filed on 12-3-2001 and ad interim order was passed. He has contended that the respondent has closed the factory on 1-4-2001 without prior permission of the Labour Court and during the operation of ad interim order and have filed an application under Standing Order 11-A of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 for permission to close down the factory before 6th Labour Court, Hyderabad. He has contended that in respect of Haji Idrees and Haji Muhammad Salim, who have been made as respondent in the petition, in reply filed by Muhammad Yousaf, Proprietor for the respondents, has shown that they have no concern with the factory but no such documents have been produced to show that they have no connection with the factory and that Muhammad Yousaf is the sole proprietor. It is contended that Muhammad Idrees had appeared before the Deputy Director Labour, Hyderabad on 6-4-2001 with Muhammad Yousaf, as such it cannot be said that Muhammad Idrees has no concern with the factory. He has contended that ad interim prohibitory order was delivered by hand by the petitioner to the respondent and was also sent by post, as such the contention of the respondent that they had no knowledge about the interim prohibitory order till 6-4-2001, when he attended a joint meeting before the Deputy Director Labour, Hyderabad, Conciliator will have no force.
4. On the other hand it has been contended by Mr. Mehboob Rizvi learned Advocate for the respondents that the petition has been filed by one Rafique Qureshi, General Secretary of the Union in his individual capacity and petition has not been filed by the union through its General Secretary.
Moreover, the union is not C.A.B., as such the petition is not maintainable. It is contended that Muhammad Yousaf is sole Proprietor of Super Biscuit Factory, Haji Muhammad Idrees and Haji Muhammad Salim, who have been shown as respondents in the petition are not Partners.
Muhammad Yousaf, Sole Proprietor of Super Biscuit Factory being a necessary party has not been joined as respondent and Haji Muhammad Idrees and Haji Muhammad Salim have been joined as respondents, as such the petition is bad for non-joinder and misjoinder. It is contended that the respondent, has no knowledge about formation of the trade union and there is also no document in proof to show that the petitioner had given any notice in writing to the respondent for formation of trade union, as contemplated under section 8-A of I.R.O., 1969. Respondent came to know first time on 6-4-2001 during the course of joint meeting held by Deputy Director Labour Conciliator, Hyderabad about formation of trade union and about ad interim prohibitory order passed on 12-3- 2001. It is contended that there were 37 workers on the role of the factory, out of 37 workers, 25 workers have voluntarily resigned and collected their legal dues during March, 2001, hence allegations of closure of factory is not correct. However, process of closure of factory is in progress.
An application under Standing Order 11-A has been filed before the 6th Sindh Labour Court, Hyderabad. It is contended that the respondents have not committed any act of unfair labour practices as such main petition being not maintainable be dismissed, Alongwith arguments he has also filed photostat copy of document of National Tax Number Certificate, showing Muhammad Yousaf to be Proprietor of. Super Biscuit Factory and his status shown in the National Tax Number Certificate is individual 5.
I have considered arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have gone through documents placed on record.
6. It is an admitted position that Super Biscuit Factory Mazdoor Union, which has been registered by RTU, Hyderabad on 22-2-2001 by certificate of registration Annexure All is not C.B.A. In the establishment of respondent. The petition has been filed by Muhammad Rafique, General Secretary of Super Biscuit Factory Mazdoor Union. It has not been filed by Super Biscuit Factory Mazdoor Union through its General Secretary as such petition will not be maintainable. Even otherwise Super Biscuit Factory Mazdoor Union is not C.B.A., as such it cannot espouse the cause of individual workers. The petition filed by Muhammad Rafique Qureshi at the most will be petition filed by him as individual. The petitioner has not mentioned any specific instance of unfair labour practice of union activities, so as to cause annoyance to the respondents to issue threats that for formation of union by the workers and its registration, the factory will be closed. The petitioner has not produced any document to show that any information was given to the employer in writing of formation of union and an application to have been made for its registration as required under section 8-A of .R.O., 1969, as such the contention of Mr. Mehboob Rizvi, learned Advocate for the respondents that it was not in knowledge of the respondent about formation of the union and its registration till 6-4-2001, when a joint meeting was attended by Muhammad Yousaf, Sole Proprietor of Messrs Super Biscuit Factory before Deputy Director Labour, Hyderabad, appears to have force. I do not find on record any document to show as an acknowledgement of receipt of ad interim order dated 12-3-2001 by the respondents, as such the contention of Mr. Mehboob Rizvi learned counsel for the respondent that Muhammad Yousaf, Sole Proprietor of the respondent-Establishment came to know about ad-interim order on 6-4-2001, when he attended joint' meeting before the Deputy Director Labour, Hyderabad will have weight. Even, otherwise, it is contention of respondents that Muhammad Yousaf is the Sole Proprietor of respondent-Establishment and Muhammad Idrees and Haji Muhammad Salim are not his partners in the Establishment. Merely the fact that Muhammad Idrees alongwith Muhammad Yousaf, attended the joint meeting before Deputy Director Labour, Hyderabad, will not be sufficient to show that Muhammad Idrees is also partner of Muhammad Yousaf, who according to the document annexed with the written arguments. Photocopy of National Tax Number, certificate appears to be the Sole Proprietor. The petition, therefore, is bad for non-joinder and misjoinder of the parties. Besides it is contended by respondents that out of 37 workers on the role of the respondent: Establishment. 25 have resigned and have taken their legal dues and only 12 workers remained on role of the factory and entire factory has not been closed but it is in process of closure, and such application for permission to close down the Establishment has been filed by Super Biscuit Factory through its Sole Proprietor Muhammad Yousaf before Labour Court No,6, Hyderabad.
7. For the abovesaid reasons the petition does not fall within the ambit of unfair labour practices as it has been contemplated under section 15 of I.R.O., 1969. The petition filed by Muhammad Rafique Qureshi, admittedly not filed by the union and the union is also not C.B.A., so as to espouse cause of individual workers, as such it is not maintainable. Petition is, therefore, dismissed. Since the main petition itself has been dismissed, as such application dated 15-6-2001 to direct the respondents to pay wages to the workers from 1-4-2001, and application dated 15-6-2001 to restrain the respondents from removing the machinery also stand dismissed. Ad interim order dated 12-3-2001 is recalled.