| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 1206 2020 SLD 1206 2020 PLC 88 |
Sindh High Court
Constitution Petition No. D-4506 of 2016, decided on 12th October, 2018, Date of hearing: 9th October, 2018.
IRFAN SAADAT KHAN, JUSTICE ADNAN-UL-KARIM MEMON, JUSTICE
Muhammad Musharaf Malik behalf of Ghulam Ali for
Respondent No. 3 Shehryar Mehar, Assistant Advocate-General, Singh along with Khalil, Ms. Shamim Imran and Ms. Humaira for
Respondents.
Constitution Petition No. D-4506 of 2016, decided on 12th October, 2018, Date of hearing: 9th October, 2018.
IRFAN SAADAT KHAN, JUSTICE ADNAN-UL-KARIM MEMON, JUSTICE
Muhammad Musharaf Malik behalf of Ghulam Ali for
Respondent No. 3 Shehryar Mehar, Assistant Advocate-General, Singh along with Khalil, Ms. Shamim Imran and Ms. Humaira for
Respondents.
MUSHTAQUE AHMED
VS
MEMBER, SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND 2 OTHERS
Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002
Section: 46
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XCI of 2002)--- ----S. 46---Grievance petition---Watchman---Services of employee were hired verbally by the employer company but same were dispensed with without issuing any letter of termination---Employee filed grievance petition but same was dismissed concurrently---Validity---Employee was worker of the contractor and he rendered his service for the employer-company---Agreement executed between the parties had expired---Service of employee was hired for a specific period and he had received salary for the same---Employee had worked through third party contractor, he was not employee of the company but he was worker of a private contractor who had hired his service for the company---Employee stood relieved from his service automatically after expiry of agreement with the contractor---Employee could not claim reinstatement of his service in the employer company and if he had any claim he should have made contractor as party in the proceedings but he had failed to do so for reason best known to him---Concurrent findings rendered by the Courts below could not be interfered with unless some question of law or erroneous appreciation of evidence was made out---Courts below had considered every aspect of the case while appreciating evidence adduced by the parties---No illegality or irregularity had been pointed out in the impugned s passed by the Courts below---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Messrs State Oil Company Limited v. Bakht Siddique and others 2018 SCMR 1181 ref. Dilshad Khan Lodhi v. Allied Bank of Pakistan and others 2008 SCMR 1530 and General Manager National Radio Telecommunication Corporation Haripur District Abotabad v. Muhammad Aslam and others 1992 SCMR 2169 rel. JUDGMENT ADNAN-UL-KARIM MEMON, JUSTICE:---.---Through this Constitutional Petition, the Petitioner has assailed the Judgments dated 06.05.2016, passed by the learned Member of Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi [SLAT] in Appeal No. KAR-555/2010 and the Judgment dated 05th May, 1998 passed by the learned, IIIrd Sindh Labour Court (SLC) in Grievance Application No. 13 of 1995 filed by the Petitioner. 2. The basic claim of theβ¦
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