Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)-- ---S. 2(i) & S.O. 14, proviso--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss.25-A & 38(3)--Seasonal factory--Sugar mills functioning during cane-crushing period is a seasonal factory--Printed cards- supplied to workers reflecting two categories viz. "permanent" and "seasonal"--Services terminated by end of cane­-crushing season--Workmen reporting for re-employment on re-start of cane-­crushing season--Persons junior to him admittedly re-employed--Re-employment refused to workman respondent on the plea that he was a temporary workman-­Plea repelled--Held: Word "workman" used in proviso to S.O. 14 included both "permanent" and "temporary" workers and such workman in a seasonal factory is neither a permanent nor a temporary workman but simply a workman working in "a seasonal factory" and his posting starts and terminates with the season and his right is protected under the proviso of Standing Order 14--Order of Labour Court awarding re-employment from date of restart of season with consequential benefits upheld in appeal. DECISION This appeal is filed against the order passed by learned Presiding Officer, Sind Labour Court No. VI at Hyderabad, dated 30-4-1988, whereby he allowed the grievance petition of the respondent and ordered his reinstatement with effect from 1-10-1987, with consequential benefits. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent claimed to be a seasonal worker of the appellants from 9-12-1986 and his services were terminated at the end of season of 1986-87 on 23-3-X987. He presented himself for re-employment on the start of cane-crushing season of the appellants on 1-10-1987, but, instead of employing him the appellants employed 7 persons, junior to the respondent. After adopting the grievance procedure, he filed the grievance petition before the learned Labour Court. The appellants resisted the petition on the ground that the respondent was not a seasonal worker but was a temporary worker. 3. I have heard Mr. Raes M. Mushtaq, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Ahsanul Haq, the learned Advocate for the respondents. 4. The…

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