| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1995 SLG 1195 1995 SLD 1195 1995 PLC 354 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. SUK-134 of 1993, decided on 20th February, 1995.
MUSHTAQ ALI QAZI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. SUK-134 of 1993, decided on 20th February, 1995.
MUSHTAQ ALI QAZI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD MITHAL and 3 others
VS
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----S. 25-A---Grievance petition---Maintainability---Employees who were employed by Government's Agricultural and Livestock Department as Senior Store-Keepers under Director. Agricultural Engineering had filed grievance petition for redress of their grievances---Employees who were Government servants and were drawing salaries under Basic Pay Scales, were not "workers" and could not take advantage. of provisions of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. M. Latif Saghar for Appellants. Mazhar Ali Chohan, AGP for Respondents. Date of hearing: 15th February, 1995. DECISION This appeal arises from an order passed by Sindh Labour Court No.VII, Sukkur in the matter of an application under section 25-A of the I.R.O., 1969, whereby the same was dismissed on the only ground that the applicants were civil servants and not workers governed by Standing Orders Ordinance. 2. The appellants were employed by the Agricultural and Livestock Department, Government of Sindh as Senior Store-Keepers under the Director Agricultural Engineering Sindh. They were drawing their salary in the Basic Pay Scales 6 and 10. Later on they were all promoted and granted BPS-10 but the pay scale was afterwards treated to be fixed wrongly and the appellants were required to refund the excess payment drawn, immediately. They served the authorities a grievance notice claiming to be workman within the meaning of Workmen's Compensation Act and the Factories Act and thereafter they filed their grievance petitions before the Labour Court. 3. The Government in their Written Statement have denied the allegations and contended that the appellants are civil servants, governed by the Efficiency and Discipline Rules and they cannot have recourse to section 25-A of the I.R.O., 1969. 4. The learned Labour Court, after recording the evidence and hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that their grievance applications were not maintainable and the same were, therefore, dismissed. Against this order they have preferred this appeal. 5. It has been argued by the learned Advocate for the appellants that the appellants are not civil servants within the meaning of theβ¦
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