Case Details

Citation(s)
1972 SLD 3136 = 1972 PLC 394
Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal
Application No. 50 of 1971, decided on 12th 80ctober 1971.
Presented By: Hidayat Hussain, Chairman, Muhammad Rasheed and Shaukat Ali A. Nanji, Members
Fayaz Muhammad Azad for Applicants. Mohiuddin Sheikh, Manager for
Respondents.

EMPLOYEES' UNION

VERSUS

MESSRS DYER TEXTILE & PRINTING MILLS LTD., KARACHI

Law: West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)

Section: 11(3)

Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance, (XXIII of 1969)

Section: 26

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Stand ing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) S. 11(3) read with industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 26-Indefinite closure ---Cannot be resorted to from very beginning and before expiry of lay off of fourteen days-Immediate closure for indefinite period resort ed to without following procedure laid down In S. 26, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 regarding negotiations, held, a cloak for removal of workmen from service.                                                                                                                                       ORDER HIDAYAT HUSSAIN (CHAIRMAN).-The applicant-Union are the collective bargaining agent with the respondent-Manage ment. An agreement was entered into between the parties on 28th December 1970, in terms of which certain demands of the workers had been acceded to by the Management. The allegation of the applicant-Union is that in order to nullify the effect of the agreement the respondent-Management resorted to illegal practice of coercion, intimidation and victimisation of the workmen. Criminal complaints have been filed by the General Secretary of the Union against the respondent-Management for committing breach of the terms of the agreement in the months of June and July. It is the case of the applicants that as a measure of retaliation the respondent-Management closed down their 'C' shift requiring the workers to report for duty in the other shifts but when they reported for duty the Management refused to take them back on their previous terms and insisted on their accepting the job as Badli workers. Ultimately they closed down 'A' and 'B' shifts also. The applicant-Union preferred Application No. 50/71, under section 45 of the I. R. O., 1969 against that closure and this Court through its…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register