| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1971 SLG 3036 1971 SLD 3036 = 1971 PLC 163 |
Pakistan Labour Court
Appeal Case No. 244 of 1970, decided on 13th October 1970.
Presented By: Md. Nurul Islam Khan, Chairman, M. Karim and S. A. Haleem, Members
A. M. Rashiduzzaman for Petitioner. Kazi Shaifuddin for
Respondent.
Appeal Case No. 244 of 1970, decided on 13th October 1970.
Presented By: Md. Nurul Islam Khan, Chairman, M. Karim and S. A. Haleem, Members
A. M. Rashiduzzaman for Petitioner. Kazi Shaifuddin for
Respondent.
C. & B. ROAD & BUILDING SRAMIK UNION, CHITTAGONG
VERSUS
THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS, GOVERNMENT OF EAST PAKISTAN, DACCA
Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance, (XXIII of 1969)
Section: 7, 1
(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIH of 1969), S. 7(d) Trade Union-Constitution of-Membership cannot be extended to two or more establishments. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S.1 (3) Workers of Roads and Highways Directorate of East Pakistan Government engaged infield services - "Workmen" for purposes of forming Trade Union-Such workers, held, not associated with Administration of State and therefore not Government servants. Registration :of the Trade Union of the employees of the Chief Engineers of Rows and Highways and Buildings Directorate of the Government -of East Pakistan was refused by the Registrar on the ground that as they were Government workers, and employed in the administration of the State under section 1(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance they could not form a Union. Held, as days-pass by, Government is interfering more and more in the field of private activities and thus as the processes of nationalisation of industries goes on Government would take into its fold more -arid more functions which have been performed by private agencies. There is no doubt that in the present matter the Government is computing side by side with the private agency in this kind of work as is being done by the second party establishment. So they do not stand in a better footing-and there would be an unnecessary discrimination if the definition of the Administration of State' is extended to these workers only because they are working under the different employers such as the Government. In that view it is obvious that such workers are not associated with the `Administration of the State' since their functions have nothing to de with the inalien able function of the State, which is termed as `Administration of the State'. These workmen being e aged in field services like any other workmen who could perform this work under any private agency should be termed as workmen and they have the right to form a Trade Union in consonance with the provisions of law. DECISION MD. NURUL ISLAM KHAN (CHAIRMAN). This is an applica tion under section 8(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, hereinafter referred to as…