| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 1296 2019 SLD 1296 2019 SCMR 946 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 1189 of 2014, decision & hearing Dated: 11-04-2019. (On appeal against the Judgment Dated 19.03.2014 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in W.P. No. 21698 of 2011)
GULZAR AHMED, JUSTICE QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Faisal Mehmood Ghani, Advocate Supreme Court
Respondent(s) by: Zulfiqar Khalid Maluka, Advocate Supreme Court
Civil Appeal No. 1189 of 2014, decision & hearing Dated: 11-04-2019. (On appeal against the Judgment Dated 19.03.2014 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in W.P. No. 21698 of 2011)
GULZAR AHMED, JUSTICE QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Faisal Mehmood Ghani, Advocate Supreme Court
Respondent(s) by: Zulfiqar Khalid Maluka, Advocate Supreme Court
HABIB BANK LIMITED
VS
GULZAR KHAN AND OTHERS
Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002
Section: 2(xxx)
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001
Section: 9(1)
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.XXIX,R.1
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XCI of 2002)--- ----S. 2(xxx)---Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 2(i)---Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001), S. 9(1)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXIX, R. 1---"Workman"---Scope---Whether a Bank manager (Officer-Grade II) was a workman---Grievance petition before Labour Court filed by a Bank manager---Maintainability---Respondent-Bank manager admitted in his evidence, that his duties included issuing of drafts and cheques, opening of accounts, closing of cash with signature of second officer, depositing of cash in the strong room and locking the same---All affairs of the branch were under his management and control, even the entire cash and record of the Bank relating to the branch as well as all communications of the branch were under his supervision, upon which he was required to take decisions as to how the same had to be dealt with in the best interest of the Bank---Such functions of the Manager amply demonstrated the nature of his work, which was mainly managerial and supervisory and not of a clerical nature---Functions of the Manager did not fall within the ambit of term 'workman' as defined in the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 or the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002---Further S. 9(1) of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 stated that a branch manager of the Bank was competent to file a suit on behalf of the Bank---In such regard, reference could also be made to the provision of O. XXIX, R. 1, C.P.C., which provided that in suits by or against a corporation, any pleading may be signed and verified on behalf of the corporation by the secretary or by any director or other principal officer of the corporation who was able to depose to the facts of the case---Person who was authorized by law to file a suit on behalf of a Bank in the Court (and verify and sign pleadings) could not be considered to be a 'workman'---Labour Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the grievance petition filed by the Bank manager---Appeal was allowed accordingly. National Bank of…
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