Case Details

Citation(s)
1981 SLG 2023 1981 SLD 2023 1981 PLC 61
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-78 of 1980, heard on 27th March, 1980.
Z. A. CHANNA, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

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

ASIATIC SHIPPING AGENCIES LTD., KARACHI

VS

ABDUL RASHID ATHER

Law:

Section:

(a) West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)- - S. 1(4)-Number of workers employed-Disputed for purpose of applicability of Ordinance-List of employees indicating number more than 20-Management contending that list included names of Executives and non-workers also-Burden to establish that particular employee was not a "worker"-Upon Management-Chief Accountant ­No proof that duties were not clerical-Held, a worker-West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 2(i). Dost Muhammad Cotton Mills v. Muhammad Abdul Ghani P L D 1975 Kar. 342 rel. (b) West of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)- -- S. O. 12-Termination simpliciter-Requirement-Written order indicating reasons and 6ne month's notice or pay in lieu thereof-No reasons indicated-Order liable to be set aside-Workmen on reinstate­ment, held, entitled to back benefits after deducting emoluments if received by remaining employed elsewhere during intervening period. Masud Mirza for Appellant. Fakhruddin Farooqui for Respondent. DECISION This appeal by the Management is directed against the decision given by the learned First Labour Court, on 22-1-1980, directing the re-instatement of the respondent-workman with full back benefits. 2. Mr. Masud Mirza, the learned Representative for the Asiatic Ship­ping Agencies Ltd., the appellant herein, has assailed the impugned decision of the learned Labour Court on three grounds. The learned Representative con­tended that the Standing Orders are not applicable to the establishment of the appellants and consequently the mere fact that the services of the respondent ­workman were terminated without complying with the provisions of Standing Order 12 gave no right to the respondent-workman to challenge the termina­tion of his services by way of a grievance petition under section 25-A, I. R. O. The learned Representative sought to contend that the number of workmen in the appellant-establishment during the twelve months immediately preced­ing the termination of services of the respondent-workman had throughout been less than…
🔒
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