| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1995 SLG 1136 1995 SLD 1136 1995 PLC 261 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeals Nos. KAR-280 to KAR-282 of 1994, decided on 11th January, 1995.
MUSHTAQ ALI QAZI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeals Nos. KAR-280 to KAR-282 of 1994, decided on 11th January, 1995.
MUSHTAQ ALI QAZI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
ABID HUSSAIN and 2 others
VS
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXI11 of 1969)--- ----S. 25-A---West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, S.O. 12(3)---Termination of service ---Reinstatement---Employees who were employed as security guards worked continuously for a period of two or three years, but their services were terminated orally without giving any reason---Employers in terminating services of employee had violated mandatory provisions of S.O. 12(3) of Ordinance, 1968 which provided that service of any workman would not be terminated except by order in writing stating reasons for termination---Order terminating services of employees was set aside and they were ordered to be re-instated with full back benefits as they had not been gainfully employed meanwhile. Haq Nawaz Baloch for Appellants. R.Y. Khan Yousufi for Respondent No. 2. Date of hearing: 10th January, 1995. DECISION These three connected appeals are against the decisions of learned Fifth Sindh Labour Court, Karachi, dismissing applications of the appellants filed under section 25-A of the I.R.O., 1969, praying for their re-instatement in service. 2. The facts of these cases, which are more or less similar, are to the effect that the applicants, who are army pensioners, were employed by the respondent-company as Security Guards and they were posted at different places for work as such. It is the case of the appellants that they were given the leaflets containing terms and conditions of service and they were to get payment from the respondent-company irrespective of the nature or place of posting. They were given uniforms by the respondent-company. They were also supplied Kalashnikov weapons for defence. They had to approach the respondent whenever they required casual leave and they were entirely doing their work according to the wishes of the respondents. They were permanent workmen as they have continued in service for two or three years. Their services were terminated orally without any written order stating reasons for the termination. They have also not been paid their legal dues. They have remained unemployed after their termination of service. 3. On the other hand the case of…
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