| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1983 SLG 397 1983 SLD 397 1983 PLD 133 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 43 and 44 of 1980, decision dated: 24-11-1982.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C.J., MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH AND SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JJ
Ch. Abdur Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants (in both the Appeals). Bashir Ahmad Ansari Advocate Supreme Court and M. A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record.
Civil Appeals Nos. 43 and 44 of 1980, decision dated: 24-11-1982.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C.J., MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH AND SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JJ
Ch. Abdur Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants (in both the Appeals). Bashir Ahmad Ansari Advocate Supreme Court and M. A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record.
REHMAT GILL AND another
VS
QUETTA CANTONMENT BOARD
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)- Ss. 1 (3) & 25 read with Cantonments Act (11 of 1924), Ss. 3, 13-A, 30, 116 & 117-Applicability of Ordinance-"Cantonment"-Meaning-Management and upkeep of Cantonments-Held, necessarily a service directly concerned and connected with Armed Forces-Employees of , Cantonment Board-Held, excluded from application of Ordinance.- [Words arid phrases]. Chambers Shorter English Dictionary ref. JUDGMENT SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.-Leave to appeal was granted to the two employees of the Quetta Cantonment Board, one a Sweeper and the other a Chowkidar, to examine whether Cantonment Board of which they were employees was performing functions connected with Armed Forces so as tee, exclude the operation of Industrial Relations Ordinance on -the basis of its section ,1 (3) thereby disentitling them to the remedy provided under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance: The facts in C. A. No. 43/1980 are that the appellant Rehmat Gill was employed as a Sweeper in Cantonment Board, Quetta. He was charge-sheeted, departmentally proceeded against and by way of punishment dismissed from service on 24-1-1978. He filed an application under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance in the Labour Court. A - preliminary objection was raised by the Cantonment Board, respondent, to the competence of the proceedings in the Labour Court on the ground that the Cantonment Board was discharging functions in connection with the Armed Forces and in view of the provisions made in section 1 (3), the Industrial Relations Ordinance was inapplicable to its employees. The Labour Court overruled this objection and held that no such exemption or exclusion was available to the Cantonment Board and the proceedings were competent. An appeal was preferred but the same was dismissed by the appellate tribunal holding that the Cantonment Boards were not performing any functions directly or indirectly concerned with or incidental to the functions of the Armed Forces and consequently its employees could redress their grievances by resorting to section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance. Faced with this determination, the respondent invoked…
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