damas andrew haule 40 others vs dawascodawasa 2022 tzhcld 767 25 august 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT PAR ES SALAAM LABOUR REVISION NO. 151 OF 2021 Arising from ruling of the Commission for Mediation and Arbitration ofDSMatllala (Fungo: Mediator) dated 13th April 2018 in Labour Dispute No. CMA/DSM/ILA/R. 1271/17 DAMAS ANDREW HAULE & 40 OTHERS................................... APPLICANTS VERSUS DAWASCO/DAWASA.......... ........................... ............................ RESPONDENT RULING K. T. R. MTEULE, J 16th August 2022 & 25th August 2022 This ruling emanates from a point of preliminary objection raised by the respondent challenging this Application for revision for having been filed out of time without leave of the Court. In determining the Preliminary objection, the court issued scheduling orders for dates of filing of the written submissions. On behalf of the Respondent Ms. Zakia Selemani Mroy timely filed her submissions, but the applicants failed to file their reply, hence the matter proceeded ex parte. I have taken note of Ms. Mroy's submissions concerning the jurisdiction of the CMA in the matter where DAWASCO being a Public Cooperation is i involved making the applicants herein to be Public Servant. Since this was not part of the preliminary point of objection, I see no reason to dwell on it. I will be focused in determining the point of law raised herein asserting the application to be time barred. Supporting the preliminary objection on time limitation, Ms. Mroy alluded that this revision was filed on 22nd April 2021 while the CMA award was delivered on 13th April 2018. While taking note of other several applications which were filed by the Applicant and being struck out on technical reasons, the Respondent is of the view that the applicant ought to have sought extension of time as there was no any leave granted by the Court to allow the Applicant to file this application out of time. According to the Respondent, this revision application discloses nothing as to whether the applicant was granted leave to file it out of time. Timing for the filing of a revision application is governed by Section 91 (1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act Cap 366 of 2019 R.E which provides for six weeks for filing of revision application to challenge an award issued by the CMA. The section provides:- "91.-(1) Any party to an arbitration award made under section 88 (10) who alleges a defect in any arbitration proceedings under the auspices of the 2 Commission may appiy to the Labour Court for a decision to set aside the arbitration award- fa) Within six weeks of the date that the award was served on the appiicant uniess the aiieged defect invoives improper procurement; (b) If the aiieged defect involves improper procurement, within six weeks of the date that the applicant discovers that fact." It is not disputed that the CMA was delivered on 13th April 2018 and that this Application was filed on 22 April 2021. This is far beyond the six weeks provided by the Law. I have gone through the record and I could not find any leave granted to the Applicants to lodge this Application for revision out of time. It is obvious that the Application is time barred with no leave to file it out of time. For that reason, I uphold the Preliminary objection. I hereby dismiss this application for being time barred. No orders as to costs. It is so ordered. Dated at Dar es Salaam this 25th Day of August 2022 KATARINA REVOCATI MTEULE JUDGE 25/08/2022 3