| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 1601 2015 SLD 1601 2015 PLC 207 |
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No. D-4514 and C.M.A. No.28831 of 2013, heard on 13-03-2015, hearing DATE : 13-03-2015.
MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE, NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE
Shoukat Ali Choudhry for Petitioner. M.A.K. Azmati for
Respondent No. 1.
Constitutional Petition No. D-4514 and C.M.A. No.28831 of 2013, heard on 13-03-2015, hearing DATE : 13-03-2015.
MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE, NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE
Shoukat Ali Choudhry for Petitioner. M.A.K. Azmati for
Respondent No. 1.
MCB BANK LTD. THROUGH ATTORNEY
VS
TARIQ ZAMEER SIDDIQUI AND 2 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012)--- ----Ss. 33, 53 & 54---Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.O.12(3)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Dismissal from service---Grievance petition---Jurisdiction of National Industrial Relations Commission---Scope---Employer (Bank) was an "establishment" and respondent a "workman" within the meaning of Industrial Relations Act, 2012---Jurisdiction to adjudicate grievance petition of "workman" lay with the National Industrial Relations Commission---Counsel for the employer bank, had misconceived Cl.(3) of Standing Order 12 of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance,1968---Present matter coming within scope of Industrial Relations Act, 2012, proper forum was National Industrial Relations Commission---High Court declined interference under constitutional jurisdiction. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE:.--- By means of a short order dated 13-3-2015 we dismissed this petition for reasons to be recorded later. The following are our reasons for having done so. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.1 was a workman within the meaning of the labour laws. He was employed with the petitioner, a banking company ("Bank"). Disciplinary action was initiated against the respondent No.1 by the Bank in terms as stated in para 2 of the petition and he was ultimately dismissed from service. Being aggrieved by such dismissal and the failure of his appeal internally as per the Bank's procedures, the respondent No.1 filed a grievance petition in the Vth Sindh Labour Court. Learned counsel submitted that this petition was, inter alia, time-barred and the Bank filed its objections to the same. The grievance petition was filed by the respondent No.1 on or about 18-1-2012. By an order dated 1-10-2012, the Labor Court directed that it would, as directed by this Court by its order dated 19-9-2012, continue the proceedings pending before it till the final decision in matters pending before a Full Bench of this Court. (We may note that those matters were ultimately decided by the Full Bench by a judgment…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492