Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 956 1976 SLD 956 1976 PLC 846
Sindh High Court

M.A. RASHID, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Sheikh ABDUL HAFIZ

VS

THE PRESIDING OFFICER, SECOND SIND LABOUR COURT AND ANOTHER

Law:

Section:

1976 P L C 846 [Karachi] Before M. A. Rashid, J Sheikh ABDUL HAFIZ versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, SECOND SIND LABOUR COURT AND ANOTHER Constitutional Petition No. 1052 of 1974, decided on 9th August 1976. (a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)---- -- S. 34-Application-Termination of services of workman - Held, does not give rise to a right -Section 34 does not apply to determina­tion of question whether termination of service was in accordance with law or not. (b) West Pakistan Shops and Establishments Ordinance (VIII of 1969)--- -- Ss. 12 & 19-Right to terminate services of an employee always available to employer under Ordinance-Dispute arising out of such termination-Held, can be heard only by Authority appointed under Ordinance and not by Labour Court. Mirza A. Rashid for Appellant. Hameed M. Siddiqui for Respondent No. 2. Date of hearing: 10th May 1976. JUDGMENT Respondent No. 2 Muhammad Hussain Rangoonwala was employed with the petitioners since 1963. On 1-1-1972 he received a notice, from the advocate of the petitioners, intimating him that his services stood terminated with effect from 31st October 1971. It was also alleged that a loan of Rs.2000 had been advanced to him and that after adjustment of one month's salary balance of Rs. 1,650 was due against him, which he was called upon to pay. A grievance petition was allegedly made on 5-1-7-?. It was duly replied on 13-1-72 by the same advocate. Subsequently, respondent No. 2 under some amnesty granted by the provincial governor approached the Labour Officer to issue a direction to the petitioners to re-instate the respondent. On failure of the petitioners to accept the directions of the Labour Officer respondent No. 2 moved an application under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance). It was prayed that the respondent be re-instated with back benefits retrospectively. In the alternate it was requested that all his legal dues and benefits with retrospective effect, including salary, salary for the notice period, salary in lieu of leave not availed, bonus, gratuity and commission may be paid. This application was resisted by the…
🔒
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