ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P. No.D-2407 of 2012

Date Order with signature of Judge

1. For Katcha Peshi.

2. For hearing of CMA No.14343/12 (stay)

---------

15.08.2012

Mr. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Khan, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. H.M. Waqar, Advocate alongwith Abdul Jabbar, General Secretary.

Mr. Rafiullah, Advocate for the respondent.

Mr. Dilawar Hussain, Stading Counsel.

-------------

Through the instant petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:-

(I) Call for the record and proceedings of the file NO.03(16)/2012 relating to the impugned registration of respondent No.3 union.

(II) Hold and declare that the registration of respondent No.3 (Ann. “P”) is illegal, void ab-initio and is liable to be quashed and set aside the same or in the alternate put the same in abeyance and direct the respondent No.1 to initiate cancellation proceedings.

(III) Suspend the operation/put in abeyance the impugned certificate of registration (Ann. “P”) and may further be pleased to restrain the respondent No.1 from initiating/continuing any proceedings in furtherance of the impugned registration certificate.

(IV) Any other relief(s) which this Hon’ble Court maybe deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case.

Notices were issued, pursuant to which comments have been filed on behalf of respondent No.3. It is further noted that in addition to the comments four office bearers of respondent No.3 namely Adil Hussain (President), Noor Hakeem (Information Secretary), Abdul Jabbar (General Secretary), Shaheen Khan (Joint Secretary) have filed their statements in following terms:-

1. That I Abdul Jabbar Khan S/o Dilamber Khan, General Secretary (Out Sider) has not been employed with the petitioner (M/s. International Textile Ltd. At Karachi.

2. That under wrong information, Syed Ghaffor Shah, Shaheen Khan, have been shown as employee at Lahore whereas none of the members belong to any places accept Karachi.

3. That on receiving of notice from this Honourable Court the above was revealed, therefore that respondent No.3 was wrongly been registered by the respondent No.1, as I have no objection fi the impugned registration is struck down.

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 has conceded to this position that the registration of respondent No.3 was granted by the learned Registrar in violation of provisions of Section 9 of IRA, 2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that an application seeking cancellation of registration of respondent No.3 dated 13.06.2012 was filed before the Registrar of Trade Union, N.I.R.C, however, no order whatsoever has been passed on it by the learned Registrar, which has given cause to the petitioner to approach this Court seeking cancellation of the registration of respondent No.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he would be satisfied and would not press the instant petition if directions are issued to the learned Registrar Trade Union (Respondent No.1) to pass an appropriate order on the application referred to hereinabove within a reasonable time. Counsel for the respondents extend their no objection for such disposal of the matter.

Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed, however, with the direction to the respondent No.1 i.e. Registrar of Trade Unions, to decide the application of the petitioner dated 13.06.2012 seeking cancellation of respondent No.3 in terms of Section 11 of the IRA, 2012 after providing an opportunity of being heard to all concerned preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Petition stands disposed of alongwith list application in the above terms.

Judge