Law: Industrial Relations Act, 2012

Section: 2(xxxiii),33

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199(1)(a)(ii)

(a) Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012)--- ----Ss.2(xxxiii) 33---Worker/Workman---Definition---Jurisdiction of the National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC)---Scope---Industrial dispute---Contention of the petitioner/bank was that the status of employees/respondents did not fall in the definition of “worker” or “workman” ---Validity---Employees were, undisputedly, working as Qasid and Typist with the petitioner/bank, thus they were, admittedly, not engaged for managerial or administrative supervisory work and had no authority to hire or fire any employee---Keeping the nature of their duties and designation, plea of the petitioner was not found convincing---Workman was a person who was not an employer and he was not engaged in managerial or administrative capacity---Status of a workman was determined not by his designation but the nature of the duties performed by him which must be skilled or unskilled, manual or clerical in nature---No illegality or irregularity was found in the concurrent s passed by NIRC---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. National Bank of Pakistan v. Anwar Shah 2015 SCMR 434; Ganga R. Madhani v. Standard Bank Limited 1985 SCMR 1511 and All Pakistan SRBC Workers Union v. National Industrial Relations Commission 2015 PLC 210 ref. (b) Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan Officer Service (Efficiency and Discipline) Regulations, 1975--- ----Regln. 2(4)---Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012), Ss.2(xxxiii) 33---Banking Companies Ordinance (LVII of 1962), S.27(B)---Absence from duty for couple of days---Major penalty---Termination from service---Misconduct---Scope---Plea of the petitioner/bank was that the termination orders of employees-respondents were wrongly set aside by National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC) as they (respondents)held general body meeting of CBA during office hours---Validity-bank had treated the absence(allegation) as the violation of S.27(B) of the Banking Companies Ordinance, 1962, whereas there was no charges of inefficiency, indiscipline, dishonesty or wilful negligence while performing official duties for the petitioner-bank---No allegation of misconduct as defined in Regln. 2(4)…

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