Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 725 2017 SLD 725 2017 PLC 409
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 207 and C.M.A No. 1811 of 2012, decision & hearing dated: 27-01-2016.
MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Ghazain Zafar Magsi
Respondent(s) by: Faisal Mahmood Ghani

MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE ARBAB A. MUNIR

VS

MACKINNONS MACKENZIE AND COMPANY THROUGH SECRETARY

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 18

Employer and employee--- ----Employee of the company---Allegation of disclosing trade secret and confidential information---Amendment in the pension rules to disentitle the employee for pension---Scope---Contention of employee-plaintiff was that amended rule should not be applied retrospectively---Validity---Business of a company such as shipping companies was not a novel or unique business which was not known to the people at large---Nothing was on record as to what trade secrets or confidential information had been passed on by the employee-plaintiff of the company---No such embargo existed on the employee-plaintiff to commence a competitive business---Only obstacle was that employee-plaintiff should not disclose trade secret and confidential information which company had failed to point out---Companies with whom defendant was associated with or working for might have found the employee-plaintiff more suitable and appropriate and/or economical and employee might have been providing better services---Such act of employee-plaintiff did not amount contrary to the contract between the employee and company---No agreement could be made in violation of Art.18 of the Constitution---Employee-plaintiff had served the company-defendant throughout his life---Matter of livelihood of employee could not be denied on account of the score that it would amount to running a parallel business---Employee-plaintiff had resigned much prior to the alleged amendment and same could not be applied retrospectively---Company-defendant could not enforce such terms which were contrary and violative of the fundamental and constitutional rights---Application against stopping the pension by the company was allowed in circumstances. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI, J.---- This is an application filed by the plaintiff to restrain the defendant from stopping or causing impediments in the pension which the plaintiff is otherwise entitled. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff was once employed with the defendant under a contract. Plaintiff served the defendant for about 33 years w.e.f. 27.6.1978. He served the defendant at various designations. He reached at the age of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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