Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution oaf Pakistan (1973)-----Art. 212(3)--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S.51-­Termination of service--Re-instatement with back benefits ordered-­Failure to re-instate--Labour Court empowered to direct payment of money value in lieu of any other benefit to which a workman is entitled under such decision. Seigfried Becon v. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal P L J 1980 Lah. 273 rel. (b) Industrial dispute-- --- Back benefits--Allowed despite worker's admission of having been employed elsewhere--Order impugned--No material available to determine exact period of employment and amount earned by such worker--Question being of fact within exclusive jurisdiction of Labour Court finding thereon, even if erroneous, not to vitiate order passed in Constitutional jurisdiction--Burden upon employer to prove affirmatively that worker was not gainfully employed elsewhere during relevant period. Karachi Transport Corporation v . Jamil Beg 1981 P L C 862 and Bantva Memon, Khidmla Committee v. Naimullah 1981 P L C 178 ref. (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-- ---Art. 212(3)--Leave to appeal, grant of--Objection raised before Labour Court and overruled--Not raised before High Court--Petitioner not entitled to raise same objection before Supreme Court. Abdul Hafeez Memon, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muzaffar Ali Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 20th October, 1983. ORDER ZAFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.--The petitioner in this case is a private limited company which according to it had two establishments at their factory site one consisting of silk division in which 17 workers were employed and the other was a tannery division in which only 3 workers were employed. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 were employed in the petitioner's silk division which was closed down on account of uneconomic operation on 10-6-1974. Consequently the services of an the 17 workers of the silk division including the above-said respondent were terminated after making payment to them of one month's notice pay. 2. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 being aggrieved by the termination of their services approached the then 1st Junior Labour Court at…

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