Case Details

Citation(s)
1985 SLG 1811 1985 SLD 1811 1985 PLC 378
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. Kar. 210 of 1983, heard on 23rd December, 1984
ALI NAWAZ BUDHANI, 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

ALLAH DITTA

VS

ZUBAIR ASSOCIATES Ltd.

Law:

Section:

. Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)---- ---Ss.25-A & 38(3)--Grievance petition against alleged illegal termination of service--Labour Court on analyzing evidence reaching conclusion that petitioner from very beginning was a liar and had concocted story falsely for getting compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and in fact had no grievance--Stand of respondent establishment . that it never employed 20 or more workers and provisions of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 were not applicable--Order of Labour Court dismissing grievance petition as not maintainable, in circumstances, upheld by Appellate Tribunal. Abdul Qadir for Appellant. S. A. Channa for Respondent. Date of hearing: 23rd December, 1984. ORDER The instant appeal is directed against the impugned order, dated 7-6-1983, passed by the Sind Labour Court No.V, Karachi. The Labour Court had dismissed the grievance petition as not maintainable. 2. The facts briefly are that appellant, Allah Ditta was a Mixer Machine Operator. The allegation is that on 1-10-1983, Allah Ditta received personal injury by an accident in the course of his employment. The injury resulted in permanent disablement, the loss of one eye. He was gate-stopped and his services were terminated on 15-10-1981. Allah Ditta then served a grievance notice on 28-12-1981. 3. The respondent's stand is that Allah Ditta was a temporary worker for the Defence Garden Project of the respondent establishment. There were less 20 workers employed in the establishment as the provisions of the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968, are not applicable. The application under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969, is not maintainable and the Labour Court had no jurisdiction. Further, the respondent has, stated that the appellant made an application against them to the Martial Law Authorities and with regard to compensation before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. The appellant's own National Identity Card issued on 16-4-1976 in which the appellant is shown having already a defective eye as mark of identification and hence, he withdrew the application from the Commissioner for Workmen's…
🔒
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