PEARL CONTINENTAL HOTEL, KARACHI WORKERS UNIONs vs MEMBER, N.I.R.C. and another
This matter arises from an appeal concerning the jurisdiction of the National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC) regarding trade union registration and subsequent termination of workers' services following the vacation of a status quo order. During the proceedings before the Supreme Court, it transpired that the appellant union and workers had already approached the Labour Court under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, and that most cases were pending for final decision while one had reached the Labour Appellate Tribunal. The core legal question addressed was whether the proceedings before the Supreme Court had become infructuous given the changed circumstances and the active recourse to the Labour Court. The Court held that no live issue remained for adjudication in the present appeal since the parties had resorted to the Labour Court. Consequently, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal with directions to the Labour Court and the Labour Appellate Tribunal to decide the pending matters expeditiously within one month without being influenced by the impugned High Court judgment. The key principle laid down is that where parties have sought alternate remedies before the appropriate forum, appellate proceedings regarding academic or abstract jurisdictional questions without a live issue may be disposed of with directions for expeditious trial.
- Whether proceedings before the Supreme Court become infructuous when the aggrieved parties have already approached the Labour Court for relief?
- Can an appellate court decline to decide an abstract jurisdictional question when no live issue remains between the parties?
- Section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969
ORDER
1. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. During the arguments, it transpired that no sooner the status quo order passed by NIRC dated December, 13, 2001 was vacated by the learned High Court of Sindh on 16th January, 2002 services of workers/appellant union were terminated. In the meanwhile, learned Full Bench of High Court Sindh had announced the judgment holding that in respect of registration of the Union, NIRC had no jurisdiction. The appellant approached the Labour Court under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Except the case of one worker remaining cases are still pending on the file of the Labour Court for final decision and reportedly arguments have A been heard and the judgment is likely to be pronounced. As far as one of the workers, whose case has been dismissed by the Labour Court had approached the Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi.
2. ' In view of the matter, we inquired from learned counsel for the appellant, as to whether in changed circumstances of the case, the instant proceedings have become infructuous, he conceded and stated that question raised by him, required to be adjudicated upon for determination of the future jurisdiction of the NIRC. The same was the opinion of learned counsel for the respondents. However, when we pointed out to them that in view of the circumstances put forth herein before there is no live issue as workers/appellants themselves have approached the Labour Court. On this, he stated that the case be disposed of with the observation that let the Labour Court decide the same expeditiously within a period of one month and same direction should be given to the Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal, without being influenced in any manner from the impugned judgment in this appeal dated 13-3-2002. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection. In view of the above the Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
3. ' Let the Labour Court as well as Labour Appellate Tribunal dispose of the case expeditiously without being influenced in any manner from the impugned judgment dated 13-3-2002, within a period of one month and judgment should be sent to the Registrar of this Court for perusal in Chambers.