Case Details

Citation(s)
1985 SLG 1850 1985 SLD 1850 1985 PLC 433
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-131 of 1984, heard on 23rd October, 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

Syed ZARIEF ZAIDI

VS

Messrs PAKISTAN STEEL FABRICATING CO. LTD.

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)---- ---S.O. 1(b)--Permanent workman--Pre-condition--Job should be of permanent nature and likely to continue for 9 months and satisfactory completion of probation period of 3 months--Appointment for fixed period mentioning that job was purely temporary and appointee paid daily wages--Definition of permanent job, in circumstances, held, not applied--Termination without notice as contemplated in appointment order, in circumstances, held, not objectionable--Dismissal of grievance petition by Labour Court against such termination order upheld by Appellate Tribunal--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25-A a 38(3). S.M. Kohistani for Appellant. H.A. Jaffery for Respondents. Date of hearing: 23rd October, 1984. ORDER This appeal is directed against the impugned order, dated 2-4-1984, of the learned Sind Labour Court No. IV at Karachi, who dismissed the application under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969, of the appellant. 2. The appellant, Syed Zarief Zaidi was appointed on 6-2-1983, as a Painter purely on temporary basis and the appointment order at page 27 of the lower Court record shows that he was to work upto 5-5-1983. The appointment order contemplates also that his services would be terminated without notice and without notice he may serve his services. He worked upto 5-5-1983, when he was given the notice of termination. Since he was subsequently required, therefore, a second temporary appointment order, dated 11-5-1983, was issued at page 31 of the lower Court, the terms and conditions were the same. On 12-6-1983, his services were finally terminated.., He was on daily wages of Rs.30, per day. 3. I have heard the learned counsel, Mr. S.M. Kohistani on behalf of the appellant and Mr. H.A. Jaffery, Advocate, for the respondents. Mr. Kohistani has argued that the appointment of the appellant was permanent one and he refers to Standing Orders' Schedule where the nature of permanent appointment and the temporary appointment is defined. The definition according to this Schedule is as under: --- "(b) 'A permanent workman' is a workman who has been engaged on work ofโ€ฆ
๐Ÿ”’
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