Law:

Section:

(a) Appointment of Chairman and Members Qualifications Rules, 2016--- ----R.3(1)---Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012), Ss.53 & 86---Chairman of the National Industrial Relations Commission, appointment of---Rule 3(1) of the Chairman and Members (Qualifications) Rules, 2016, vires of---Petitioners (Sindh Bar Council and several of its then office-bearers) invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to impugn the vires of R.3(1) of the Chairman and Members (Qualifications) Rules, 2016 ('the Rules, 2016') setting out the qualification for appointment of a person as the Chairman of the National Industrial Relations Commission ('the Commission')---Validity---Commission stands constituted under S. 53 of the Industrial Relations Act, 2012 ('the Act, 2012'), with its subsection (2) thereof envisaging that "the Commission shall consist of not less than ten full time members, including the Chairman", and its subsection (3) providing that "the qualification for appointment as a member or as the Chairman of the Commission shall be such as may be prescribed"---Section 86(1) of the Act, 2012, confers power upon the Federal Government to make rules to carry out the purposes of the Act, 2012, with the Rules having been made in exercise of that power, with R.3(1) prescribing that "No person shall be appointed as Chairman unless he is or has been judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan"---In keeping with the requirement of R.3(1), the incumbent Chairman of the Commission was a retired judge of the Supreme Court---Constitutional petition, being meritless, was dismissed, in circumstances. (b) Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012)--- ----S.53---Appointment of Chairman and Members Qualifications Rules, 2016, R.3(1)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Extension of tenure of the Chairman appointed under R.3(1) of the Appointment of Chairman and Members Qualifications Rules, 2016, assailing of---Writ of quo-warranto---Maintainability---Contention of the petitioners (Sindh Bar Council and several of office-bearers) was that the constitutional petition was in the nature of quo-warranto, hence there was no requirement…