ABASIN INTERNATIONAL WORKERS UNION, THATTA Versus MANAGER, M/S. ABASIN INTERNATIONAL DHABEJI, DISTRICT THATTA

ORDER

1. The petitioner Union has invoked Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court against the decision given by Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal on 4‑9‑1988 in Appeal No. HYD/249/88.

2. Said appeal was filed by the respondent No. 1 against order of the Registrar, Trade Unions (respondent No. 2) registering the petitioner's union for workers of the establishment of respondent No. 1.

3. Mr. Muhammad Saleem Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that learned Tribunal was not competent to entertain the appeal filed by the respondent No. 1 under section 38(3) of I.R.O., that the application for cancellation of registration of a Trade Union can be moved only by the Registrar, Trade Unions in terms of section 10(1) of I.R.O and that in the instant case no such application/complaint was moved by the Registrar, Trade Unions.

4. Mr. Nadir Khan, Assistant Director, Trade Unions, Hyderabad supported the stand taken by the petitioner.

5. Section 10(1) of IRO deals with cancellation of registration of trade unions. It reads as below:

6. "Cancellation of Registration.‑‑The registration of a trade union shall be cancelled if the Labour Court so directs upon a complaint in writing made by the Registrar that the trade union has‑‑

(i) contravened or has been registered in contravention of any of the provisions of this Ordinance or the rules; or

(ii) contravened any of the provisions of its constitution; or

(iii) made in its constitution any provision which is inconsistent with this Ordinance or the rules."

7. The provisions contained in subsection (1) of section 10 of the IRO as reproduced above, show that only on complaint in writing by the Registrar a Labour Court can direct cancellation of trade union. The power to cancel registration of trade union vests in the Registrar in view of the provisions contained in subsection (3) of section 10 of the I.R.O. In the instant case, the Registrar was not moved for cancellation of the registration, although registration of the petitioner Union was resisted by the respondent No. 1.

8. There is force in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the Tribunal was not competent to entertain the appeal. There is no provision in the IRO for filing an appeal to the Tribunal against an order of the Registrar, Trade Unions registering a trade union. Even if learned Tribunal was vested with all the powers of a Labour Court by virtue of subsection (3) of section 38 of the IRO, that was for the purpose of hearing an appeal. Moreover, even the Labour Court could not have directed cancellation of registration of a trade union on a complaint made by anybody other than the Registrar, Trade Unions.

9. In the circumstances we hold that learned Tribunal acted beyond its powers by passing the impugned order. Consequently this petition is accepted, and the impugned order is declared to have been passed without lawful authority and to be of no legal effect. There will be no order as to costs.

10. H.B.T./A‑1261/K Petition accepted.