BROOKE BOND (PAKISTAN) LTD. Versus APPELLATE TRIBUNAL N.W.F.P PESHAWER
This matter originated as a petition for special leave to appeal against a judgment of the Peshawar High Court, which had dismissed a writ petition filed by Brooke Bond (Pakistan) Ltd. The company had challenged an order by the Labour Appellate Tribunal, which reversed a Labour Court decision regarding the status of 'salesmen' employed by the company. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether a salesman employed by the company qualified as a 'workman' under the definition provided in the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Relying on the reasoning established in a concurrent identical case, Brooke Bond (Pakistan) Ltd. v. The Conciliator (appointed by the Government of Sind) and 6 others (PLD 1977 SC 237), the Supreme Court held that a salesman employed by the appellant-company is indeed a workman within the meaning of the statute. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The key principle laid down is that the nature of duties performed by salesmen in this specific context brings them within the statutory definition of a workman, thereby validating the constitution of the trade union representing them.
- Is a salesman employed by Brooke Bond (Pakistan) Ltd. a workman within the definition of section 2(xxviii) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969?
- Does the inclusion of salesmen as members of a trade union render the union illegally constituted under the Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969?
- Section 34, Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969
- Section 2(xxviii), Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969
1. MUHAMMAD AKRAM, J .--Respondent No. 3 Union Karkonan-e-Brooke Bond (Pakistan) Ltd., Abbottabad is a registered Trade Union representing inter alia the "salesmen" in the service of the Brooke Bond (Pakistan) Limited, Karachi. The Union raised certain demands on behalf of the workers and issued a notice to the company enclosing therewith the charter of demands. But the said Management refused to enter upon any negotiation with the said Union on the plea that it was an illegally constituted body.
2. On 23-8-1971 the company filed an application under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 alleging that the salesmen employed by it were not "workman" within the definition of the term and therefore the Union, having salesmen as its members, was illegally constituted.
3. On the 7th of November, 1973, Labour Court (N: W. F. P.), Peshawar accepted the application of the appellant-Company holding that a "salesman" in the company was not a workman and that the respondent-Union was not a lawfully constituted body and the notices issued by it were invalid. The respondent-Union went up in appeal against the award. On the 21st of March, 1974, the Labour Appellate Tribunal (N: W. F. P.), Peshawar accepted their appeal and set aside the award made by the Labour Court. This gave rise to a writ petition filed by the company against the respondents before the Peshawar High Court challenging the validity of the order passed by the Labour Appellate Tribunal. But a Division Bench of that Court dismissed the writ petition on the 30th of July, 1975.
4. In these circumstances the company filed a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court. This Court granted the leave to appeal to consider the question as to whether a salesman employed by the Company was a workman within the definition of section 2 (xxviii) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance.
5. In C. A. K-14 of 1973, Brooke Bond (Pakistan) Ltd. v. The Conciliator (appointed by the Government of Sind) and 6 others (P L D 1977 S C 237) an identical question was raised. For our detailed reasons recorded in that appeal we have held that a salesman employed in the appellant-Company is a workman within the definition of the term. This appeal has no force and is, therefore, dismissed. But there is no order as to costs in the circumstances of this case.
6. S. A. H. Appeal dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- Syed ZAHID HUSSAIN vs HOECHST PAKISTAN LIMITED and 2 others 1989 PLC 309
- UNITED BANK LTD., KARACHI ETC. vs MUHAMMAD ALI 1982 PLC 1050