Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 1439 1988 SLD 1439 1988 PLC 979
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeals Nos. HYD-9 and 10 of 1988, decided on 21st March, 1988.
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

MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ and 38 others

VS

PROPRIETOR, NATIONAL GLASS BANGLE INDUSTRIES

Law:

Section:

(a) West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)-- ---S.Os. 11-A & 12(3)--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25-A & S. 38(3)--Termination of service--Establishment owned by Pardahnasheen lady and unable to run same--Establishment leased out to contractor--Services of 45 workers terminated and 14 out of such workers joined service with contractor-­Grievance petitions of 2 terminated workers dismissed by Labour Court maintained m appeal. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---5. 37--Appeal can be filed only by an aggrieved person--Appeal presented through Advocate and not in person is not maintainable. Appellant in person. Respondent in person. Date of hearing: 21st March, 1988. DECISION These are two sets of appeals filed by the appellants, against a common impugned order, dated 8-12-1987, passed by the Sind Labour Court No. VI at Hyderabad, who had dismissed both the grievance petitions under section 25-A, I.R.O. 1969 jointly tiled by the respective set of appellants. As a common point of law is involved in both these appeals, therefore, I would also dispose them of by this single Decision. 2. Brief facts of the case in Appeal No. Hyd. 9/88 were that the appellants claimed to have been working in the respondent establishment but, all of a sudden they were served with a joint termination of services order, dated 4-6-1987 by post giving a notice to 45 workers that their services had been terminated, so, being aggrieved, the appellants had also served upon the respondent establishment their joint grievance notice on 211-7-1087 followed by their joint grievance petition before the learned Labour Court agitating therein that their alleged termination from service was mala fide and without any lawful justification as well as in violation of Standing Order I I-A. Against this, the respondent establishment had resisted the petition on the main ground that as the owner of the establishment was a Parda nasheen lady and since her son had refused to run the establishment, therefore, there was no alternative with her but to lease it out to a contractor and out of 45 terminated…
🔒
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