NIRC V. UBL (Infructuous Petition Dismissed)

PLJ 2010 Tr.C. (NIRC) 96
[National Industrial Relations Commission Karachi Bench]

Present: Bashir Ahmed Memon, Member

HUSSAIN BUX MALLAH--Petitioner

versus

UNITED BANK LIMITED through its Group Executive and 4 others--Respondents

Appeal No. 4A (140)/2009-K & 24(204)/2009-K, decided on 31.12.2009.

Industrial Relation Act, 2008 (IV of 2008)--

----S. 25(8)(g)--National Industrial Relation Commission (P&F) Regulations, 1973, Regul. 32(2)(1)--No cause of action--Question of maintainability--Services of the petitioner were already terminated before filing of the petition--Petition had become infructuous and was liable to be dismissed--Validity--At the time of filing of the petition, the petitioner was not in employment of the bank and his dismissal had already taken effect--Relief sought by the petitioner could be granted by NIRC in the proceedings because such powers for reinstatement could only be exercised in case of awarding punishment for unfair labour practice and not in case of acquittal of the charge--Petitioner had no any cause of action on the ground of election--Petition had become infructuous and was not maintainable.

                [Pp. 97 & 98] A & B

1990 PLC 5999 & 1984 PLC 1342, rel.

Mr. Mushtaq A. Shaikh, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. Faisal Mahmood Ghani, Advocate for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 31.12.2009.

Order

The petitioner named above has brought this petition under Section 25(8)(g) of the IRA, 2008 and alongwith it has filed application under Regulation 32(2)(c) of NIRC (P&F) Regulations, 1973 against the respondents.

2.  While admitting the petition notice was issued to the respondents. Respondents entered in appearance through their counsel and field written reply with preliminary Legal objections and counter affidavit.

3.  The respondents have asserted that prior to filing of this petition the petitioner was dismissed from service vide his dismissal order dated 07-10-2009, which was received by the petitioner on 08.10.2009, therefore this petition has become infructuous and is liable to be dismissed.

4.  I have heard arguments of both the learned counsels for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

5.  The present petition was filed before this Bench of commission on 13-10-2009. According to respondents the services of the petitioner were already terminated/dismissed before filing of present petition i.e. on 07-10-2009. The respondents have produced the copy of dismissal order of the petitioner which shows that the same was received by the petitioner through courier service and registered post on 08.10.2009 and 09-10-2009 and also received by the petitioner. In this way it is crystal clear that at the time of filing of the present petition, the petitioner was not in the employment of the respondents Bank and his dismissal has already taken effect therefore the, relief sought by the petitioner couldn't be granted by this Bench of Commission in these proceedings because such powers for reinstatement could only be exercised in case of awarding punishment for unfair labour practice and not in case of acquittal of the charges. Reliance is placed on 1990 PLC 599 and 1984 PLC 1342.

6.  It will be worth to mention here that the present petition was filed by the petitioner before this Bench of commission on the ground that during the election proceedings of the union, respondents management has threatened for victimization of the petitioner due to his involvement in trade union activities. Admittedly the elections of the union  have  been held  by  the  Commission, therefore there remains no any cause of action to the petitioner, therefore on this ground also the petition has become infructuous and is not maintainable.

In view of above facts and circumstances the petition is not maintainable which according stands.

(R.A.)     Petition dismissed.