Case Details

Citation(s)
1978 SLG 942 1978 SLD 942 1978 PLC 56
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. 329 of 1974
MUHAMMAD MIAN QURESHI, PRESIDING OFFICER

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

Appeal No. 329 of 1974 MUHAMMAD RAMZAN

VS

MUHAMMAD KAUSAR KHAN MANAGER, MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD., VEHARI Appeal No. 330 of 1974 MUHAMMAD AMIR KHAN vs MUHAMMAD KAUSAR KHAN, MANAGER, MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD., VEHARI Appeal No. 331 of 1974 MUM

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)- -----S. 25-A-Re-instatement-Godown-keepers paid wages on basis of some mutual arrangements between Management of Bank and Commer­cial concern whose stock pledged with Bank-Such watchmen not' regular employees of Bank and Management could not be com­pelled to keep service of petitioners (Go down-keepers) intact in -absence of any budgetary provision for purpose-Order of Junior Labour Court dismissing petition of such persons under S. 25-A for re-instatement cannot be taken exception to. Mahmood Nawaz Babar for Appellants. Ch. Altaf Hussain for Respondent. DESCISION The above-cited four appeals have been filed by the respective workmen against the orders, dated 20th November 1974 passed in their individual cases by the learned Presiding Officer, Junior Labour Court, Multan, dismissing their petition under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, hereinafter mentioned as the Ordinance. Since common issue is to be determined in these appeals, the present decision will dispose of them all. According to the appellants mentioned at Serial Nos. 1, 3, 4 they were go down-keepers and according to the one mentioned at Serial No. 2 above he was a peon in the service of the respondent Establishment (Muslim Commer­cial Bank Limited, Vehari. It is a common ground of all the appellants that their services have been terminated illegally without giving them any show-cause notice whereas they have been in service as permanent workmen. On the other hand it was maintained by the Management that they were not at all on the roll of the employees of the respondent, that they were go down keepers as seasonal workers on the basis of a special contract between different commercial concerns and the Management for the watch and ward of their stocks pledged with the Management (Bank) remuneration for this duty was paid to the workers concerned after realizing of the same from the proprietors of the said concerns through cheques issued by them. I have gone through the evidence produced by the parties on the record of the learned lower Court and find that vacancies of go-down-keepers do no` find place in the budgeted provision…
🔒
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