Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SHAKARGANJ MILLS LIMITED VS Respondent: PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
1991 P L C 51
1991 P L C 51
[Lahore High Court]
Before Irshad Hasan Khan, J
SHAKARGANJ MILLS LIMITED
Versus
THE PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and others
Writ Pcl4lcln No.4262 of 1959, accepted on 1st October, 1989.
Industrial Relations Ordinance. (XXIII of 1969)---
----S. 40 (2)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Settlement---Notice of termination und-r S. 40 (2) of the Ordinance---Judgment of Appellate Tribunal that in cases where notice of termination under.S.40 (2), Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was served after expiry of period of settlement agreed, the purpose of such notice and demand becomes negotiable, was called in question in view of contrary view taken by same' Tribunal in another case---On calling report from Tribunal by the High Court regarding its earlier contrary view, it was stated that the ruling in other case was not considered by the Tribunal in the present case as petitioner while arguing appeal did not cite the said case---High Court did not consider it necessary to examine the view of Tribunal given in earlier case as the management had no objection to negotiate charter of demands submitted by Union, in order to maintain cordial relations with the union---Management was directed by High Court to negotiate with union in accordance with law and in the light of undertaking given by management.
Manawar Ahmad Javid for Petitioner
Ch. Muhammad Hanif Dogar and Rana Muhammad Arshad, Addl. A. G. for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 1st October, 1989.
JUDGMENT
This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, calls in question the judgment dated 27-6-1989, whereby it was held that in cases where notice of termination under subsection (2) of section 40 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) (hereinafter called the Ordinance), the demand notice, if it is served after the expiry of the period of settlement, agreed, the purpose, of such a notice and the demand become negotiable. However, a contrary view was taken by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab in the case Workers' Union v. Hussain Sugar Mills (1984 PLC 129), wherein it was held that in terms of section 40 of the Ordinance, a settlement continues to remain binding on the parties after the expiry of the aforesaid period till the expiry of two months from the date on which either party informs the other party in writing of the intention of no longer to be bound by the settlement and that the two months notice is necessary for the termination of both kinds of settlement envisaged under section 40 of the Ordinance.
2. Report was called for from the learned Chairman of the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal to elucidate the view expressed in Worker's Union's case (supra) with reference to the impugned judgment. It is stated that he did not consider his earlier ruling as it was not cited by the petitioner while arguing the appeal.
3. It is not necessary to give any considered views on the rule laid down in Workers Union's case, which will be considered in some other appropriate case Suffice it to say that in order to maintain cordial relations with the respondent Worker's Union, the management of the petitioner Mills has no objection to negotiate the charter of demand dated 1-3-1989 submitted by the respondent Union. It his also been agreed that the petitioner will convene the first meeting on 10-10-1989 at 10.00 a.m. in the Mills office with the President, Senior Vice President and the General Secretary of the Respondent Union to discuss the charter of demand.
4. In view of the above, the: petitioner is directed to negotiate, with .the respondent Union the charter of demands dated 1-3-1989, in accordance with law and in the light of the undertaking given by Mr. Muhammad Hussain Chatha, Factory Manager of the Petitioner Mills. With these observations, the writ petition is accepted, but there shall be no order as to costs.
H.B.T./S-713/L Petition accepted.