Case Details

Citation(s)
1975 SLG 340 1975 SLD 340 1975 SCMR 535
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-120 of 1974, decision dated: 11th September 1974
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J. AND ANWARUL HAQ, J
Mansoor Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Y. A. Kidwai, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Naim-ud-Din, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ali Akbar, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents.

DOST MUHAMMAD COTTON MILLS LTD.

VS

MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHANI AND others

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) -- S. 15-Order of termination of service reading : "Although we gave you reasonable time to work as Incharge of the Account Section, but infortunately, we could not get the satisfactory results"-Order, held, rightly considered by Tribunals below as in effect an order of dismissal. Messrs Malik & Haq and another v. Muhammad Shamsul Islam Chowdhury P L D 1961 S C 531 ref. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.--This is a petition for special leave to appeal from an order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, dismissing a writ petition filed for calling in question an order of the Chairman, First Sind Labour Court, Karachi, dated 20-7-1972, whereby the order of the petitioner, terminating the services of the respondent had been held to be invalid. The respondent, it appears, was appointed as Chief Accountant of the petitioner-Company on a salary of Rs.1,050 per month on the 13th March 1969. But, on the 8th January 1970, he was ordered to act under the instructions of Mr. Farid Khan, who had been given full charge of the Accounts Section. Thereafter, his services were terminated on the 28th February 1970, for the following reasons: "Although we gave you a reasonable time to work as Incharge of the Account Section, but unfortunately, we could not get the satisfactory results." The respondent, treating this as an order of dismissal, within the mean­ing of section 15 of the West Pakistan (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, challenged its validity before the Labour Court, Sind, which came to the conclusion that the order was in effect an order of dismissal and not merely an order of termination. Two points, it appears, were argued before the Labour Court: Firstly, it was contended that the respondent was not a workman within the defini­tion given in the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 and, secondly, that this was a case of termination of service and not of dismissal. As already stated, the Labour Court found against the petitioner on both these points. In the High Court, the same points were argued. The respondent also contended that since…
🔒
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