Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: GENERAL SECRETARY, DOABA :ICE MILLS WORKERS UNION VS Respondent: REGISTRAR, TRADE UNIONS, PUNJAB
1988 P L C 577
1988 P L C 577
[Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab]
Present: Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal
GENERAL SECRETARY, DOABA :ICE MILLS WORKERS UNION
Versus
REGISTRAR, TRADE UNIONS, PUNJAB
Petition No. LHR. 9 of 1987, decided on 18th March, 1987.
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑
‑‑‑Ss. 22(3)(b), 62 & 38(3‑a)‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 200‑‑Trial for violating provisions of S. 22(3)(b) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969‑‑Registrar asking for list of members of union in connection with holding referendum for determination of CBA‑‑Union failing to submit such list‑‑Registrar filing complaint before Labour Court‑‑Labour Court Summoning General Secretary of Union to stand trial under S.62 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969‑‑Held: Complaint not having been filed by Court, examination of Registrar i.e. complainant was necessary under 5.200 Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 and without his examination Labour Court could not come to a conclusion that prima facie case for trial had been established‑‑Labour Court could not issue process before examining complainant‑‑Order of Labour Court set aside in revision by Appellate Tribunal and case remanded for further inquiry.
H. R. Haider for Petitioner.
Zaigham Abbas Bokhari, Assistant for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 18th March, 1987.
JUDGMENT
This is a revision challenging the order dated 27‑11‑1986 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.7 Gujranwala. Where by the petitioner was summoned to stand trial under section 62 of 'Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 for violating the provisions of section 22(3)(b), since he did not submit list of the members of its union. The Registrar wanted the list of the members in connection with holding referendum for the determination of C.B.A. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised many objections to attack the impugned order but it is not necessary to discuss everyone. However, this argument is not without force that the complainant was not examined under section 200 of Cr.P.C. before issuing a process to the petitioner to appear to stand trial. Where the complaint is filed by a Court the examination of the complainant under section 200, Cr.P.C. is not necessary. Since the Registrar cannot be said to a Court, without his examination the learned lower Court could not come to a conclusion that a prima facie case for trial had been established,
2. As a result the revision is accepted and setting aside the impugned order the case is remanded for further enquiry in the light of the observations made above.
A.E./321/Lb.P Revision accepted.