Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 810 1993 SLD 810 1993 SCMR 1889
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 1528 of 1990, decision dated: 3rd April, 1993
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ AND SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J

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

HOECHST PHARMACEUTICALS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD and others

PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--S. 2 (xxviii)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)---Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether High Court in Constitutional jurisdiction, could go into the question whether employee was `workman' or not. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----S.2 (xxviii)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 199 & 185---High Court declining to go into the question whether employee was a `workman' or not--­Validity---High Court should have gone into such question to determine whether respondent (employee) was a `workman' or not---Impugned order of High Court was set aside and case was remanded to High Court for appraising evidence to decide whether respondent (employee) was `workman' or not. Ganga R. Madhani v. Standard Bank Ltd. and others 1985 SCMR 1511; General Manager, Hotel Intercontinental, Lahore and another v. Bashir A. Malik and others PLD 1986 SC 103 and Muhammad Sadiq v. Punjab Labour Court No.1, Lahore and another PLD 1988 SC 633 rel. JUDGMENT SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J---This appeal with leave of the Court is directed against order dated 17-7-1990 of Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Writ Petition No.5018 of 1990 filed by appellants herein is dismissed in limine not interfering with judgment of Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal at Lahore, allowing appeal of respondent No.3 herein setting aside his order of removal from service with direction that he should be reinstated without back benefits. 2. Briefly stated the relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that Akhtar Hussain, respondent No.3 entered employment in the company of appellants as Junior Clerk on 12-9-1977 and according to him was subsequently promoted as Storekeeper and was as Typist and Accountant but in the papers was shown as Junior Officer, although nobody worked under him nor he performed duties of supervisory nature. Vide letter dated 27-3-1988, services of respondent No.3 were terminated with effect from 1-4-1988 with one month's salary to be paid in lieu of notice period. He sent grievance notice which was received and on finding no response he filed grievance petition under section 25-A, I.R.O. before…
🔒
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