Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 1463 1989 SLD 1463 1989 PLC 643
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Revisions Nos- FD-179 and 181 of 1983, decided on 26th February, 1984.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Kalab Ali Sheikh for Petitioners.

MECHANISED CONSTRUCTION OF PAKISTAN ITD and another

VS

MUHAMMAD MUNIR RANA and another

Law:

Section:

Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)-- ---Ss. 15 & 17--Industrial -Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 38(3-a)-­acted wages--Claim for --Application before Authority under Payment of Deducted Wages Act, 1936 made beyond 3 years from date of cause of grievance would be time-barred--Order of Authority accepting application and appellate older of Labour Court maintaining order of Authority set aside in revision. JUDGMENT The two revisions captioned above emanate from the decisions dated 26-4-1983 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4, Faisalabad in his appellate jurisdiction under section 17 of the payment of Wages Act, dismissing the appeals of the petitioners. 2. The respondents are the employees of WAPDA. They were transferred to the appellant when the latter was joined on the discontinuation of Machinery Pool Organization of WAPDA. The WAPDA issued deputation policy on 12-6-1974 and issued letter dated 12-6-1975 (Exh. P-6 in the case of Muhammad Munir and Exh. P-4 in the case of Muhammad Rashid) allowing deputation allowance to its employees sent to the appellant on deputation. This letter was circulated by the petitioners to all the employees of WAPDA, who were with it on deputation vide its endorsement (Exh. P-7 in the case of Muhammad Munir and Exh. P-5 in the case of Muhammad Rashid) at the rate of 20% of the pay. The documents do not bear exhibit marks but in the judgment of the Authority the abovementioned exhibit marks have been allotted to them. Thereafter, WAPDA issued another letter to the effect that deputation allowance would not be admissible to those WAPDA employees who were sent to the petitioners en bloc. This gave cause of grievance to the respondents and they brought applications to the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act treating it as an illegal deduction. The petitioners were allowed but on appeals the cases were remanded by the learned lower appellate Court for the decision of the within time and repeated the grant of relief. 3. So far as merits are concerned the decisions of the learned Courts below are correct. A right had accrued to the respondents under the earlier letter issued by WAPDA allowing…
🔒
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