| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLG 1216 1991 SLD 1216 = 1991 PLD 258 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 143 and 228 of 1979 and 311 to 313 of 1980, decided on 10th November, 1990. (Against the judgments dated 23-5-1979, 23-6-1979 and 18-7-1977 of the Lahore High Court in W.Ps.Nos.981. of 1978, 1546 and 1548 of 1977 respectively).
Presented By: Present. Nasim Hasan Shah, Rustam S. Sidhwa and Muhammad Afzal Lone, JJ
Javed Altaf, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate-on Record for Appellant (in CA.No.228 of 1979). Ch. Ghulam Qadir, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for
Respondents (in CA.No.228 of 1979). Abid Hussain Minto, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants (in C.As. Nos. 311 to 313 of 1980). Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents (in. C.As. Nos.311 to 313 of 1980).
Civil Appeals Nos. 143 and 228 of 1979 and 311 to 313 of 1980, decided on 10th November, 1990. (Against the judgments dated 23-5-1979, 23-6-1979 and 18-7-1977 of the Lahore High Court in W.Ps.Nos.981. of 1978, 1546 and 1548 of 1977 respectively).
Presented By: Present. Nasim Hasan Shah, Rustam S. Sidhwa and Muhammad Afzal Lone, JJ
Javed Altaf, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate-on Record for Appellant (in CA.No.228 of 1979). Ch. Ghulam Qadir, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for
Respondents (in CA.No.228 of 1979). Abid Hussain Minto, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants (in C.As. Nos. 311 to 313 of 1980). Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents (in. C.As. Nos.311 to 313 of 1980).
PACKAGES LIMITED through its General Manager and others--Appellants
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD MAQBOOL and others--Respondents
Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance, (XXIII of 1969)
Section: 25 ,
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---- S. 25-A(l)(2) & 4 --- Worker is allowed to seek redress of his grievance by approaching his employer ---Employer in such a case is required to communicate his decision within 15 days of the grievance being brought to his notice --- If the employer fails to communicate his decision within the said period or if the decision is communicated but the worker is dissatisfied with such decision, the worker may take the matter to the Labour Court within a period of two months from the date of the communication of the decision by the employer. Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---- S. 25-A(6) [subsection added by Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act (XXIX of 1973), S.16] ---Termination of service --- In case of grievance caused to the workman by termination of his employment, a speedier remedy is provided by S.25-A(6) namely that he may make an application directly to the Labour Court within a period of two months of the termination of the employment. [Subsection (6) of S.25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was, however, omitted by Labour Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 1977 which was promulgated on 28-1-1977, thus this case relates to the period falling between 1973 and 1977]. Interpretation of statutes-- ---- Non obstante clause in a provision how and when operates as an ouster of the earlier provisions. A 'non obstante' clause operates as an ouster of the earlier provisions only where there is a conflict and inconsistency between the earlier provisions and those contained in the later provision and, therefore, must be read in context in which it is operating. Accordingly, a non obstante clause will operate as ouster only if an inconsistency between the two is found to exist. Maxim-- ......Generalia specialibus non derogant"---Special provisions will control general provisions ---Interpretation. Rule is not to be understood in the sense that wherever there is a particular enactment following a general enactment the particular enactment would overrule the former. On the other hand, it is only where the particular enactment is absolutely repugnant and inconsistent with the…