| Case ID |
41224d3d-c8ea-48a4-805f-dabce4e0395a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
C.P.No.S 159 of 1999 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 27, 2000 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court dismissed the constitutional petition as not maintainable, emphasizing that the petitioners had an adequate alternate remedy under section 10 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The court ruled that the registration of the trade union could only be contested through the Labour Court, following the proper statutory process. The court's decision highlighted the importance of exhausting available remedies before seeking constitutional relief. The petitioners were found to not have utilized the statutory procedures available to them, which was a prerequisite for invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of the court. |
| Summary |
In the case of KOHINOOR TEA COMPANY (PVT.) LTD vs. DIRECTOR OF LABOUR, the Sindh High Court addressed the maintainability of a constitutional petition concerning the registration of a trade union. The court held that the employer's challenge to the union's registration was not appropriately brought before it, as the petitioners had not availed themselves of the available legal remedies under the Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969). The court reiterated that disputes regarding trade union registrations should be resolved through the Labour Court, emphasizing the significance of following statutory procedures before resorting to constitutional claims. This case underscores the legal framework governing industrial relations and the necessity for parties to utilize established avenues for redress, ensuring that judicial resources are not misallocated to disputes that can be effectively managed through specialized tribunals. The judgment serves as a precedent for future cases involving similar issues of trade union registration and the jurisdictional limits of constitutional petitions in labor disputes. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
KOHINOOR TEA COMPANY (PVT.) LTD
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, J
|
| Lawyers |
M.L. Shahani,
Muhammad Ali Mazhar
|
| Petitioners |
KOHINOOR TEA COMPANY (PVT.) LTD
|
| Respondents |
DIRECTOR OF LABOUR,
Nemo Nos. 1 and 2
|
| Citations |
2001 SLD 1629,
2001 PLC 367
|
| Other Citations |
Messrs Hakim & Sons Chemicals v. The Registrar of Trade Marks 1998 PLC 122,
Shaikh Gulzar Ali & Company v. Special Judge, Banking Court and others 1991 SCMR 590,
Adamjee Insurance Company v. Pakistan 1993 SCMR 1798,
Abdur Rehman v. Haji Mir and others PLD 1983 SC 21,
Mumtaz Ahmed and others v. Assistant Commissioner and another PLD 1990 SC 1195
|
| Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969),
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
10,
199
|