MUHAMMAD ASLAM KHAN vs Messrs INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED

' MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J.--- Through this revision application, the applicant/worker has furnished an information for the purpose of examining the legality of the order, dated 6th March, 2006 passed by Labour Court No,V at Karachi, whereby the Labour Court declined to grant interim injunction to the applicant/worker by way Ic of restraining the respondent/employer from initiating disciplinary proceedings against him.

2. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the order sought to be revised has been examined.

3. The applicant/worker was charge-sheeted for acts of alleged misconduct, vide letter dated December 21, 2005, for levelling false allegations against the senior executives of the respondent- Company in his 'speech during referendum campaign at Factory Gate No,1 on 10-12-2005 and issuing threats to catch hold of Mr. Waseem Sufi by neck besides instigating and inciting the workers who had assembled there. The respondent/Management not being satisfied with explanation submitted by the applicant passed orders for holding an inquiry vide notice dated February 23, 2006. The applicant/worker challenged the said charge-sheet through grievance petition. Along with the petition an application for injunction praying therein for restraining the respondent/ Management from initiating any disciplinary action against the applicant/ worker was also moved. But the prayer was declined and the application was dismissed.

4. It is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that since the respondent/Management was nursing grudge against the applicant/worker and, therefore, the charge-sheet and the subsequent holding of inquiry against him was tainted with malice. That the applicant will suffer irreparable loss if dismissed.

5. The contention raised on behalf of the applicant/worker, at the moment, could not be appreciated. It will be for the applicant to prove that the charge-sheet issued to him and subsequent proceedings were initiated with ulterior motives. Indeed, it will require recording of evidence. However, at this juncture it can be said with certainty that initiating disciplinary proceedings against a worker on account of misconduct is a legal right of the employer. An employer cannot be restrained from exercising his right unless extraordinary exceptional circumstances are placed before the Court. In the present circumstances, restraining the employer from initiating disciplinary action against his employee will tantamount to pre-empting his decision which cannot be the scheme of the law as it may give rise to anarchy. Labour laws provide adequately efficacious remedy to a worker against wrongful, illegal and arbitrary dismissal, as after adjudication he can be reinstated and/or compensated. Thus, there is no question of irreparable loss. Similarly, protection has been provided to the workers and employers against the acts of unfair labour practice. A worker can approach an appropriate forum to seek remedy against victimization on account of trade union activities.

6. In the circumstances, there is no ground to exercise the revisional powers. The application is accordingly dismissed.