Case Details

Citation(s)
1994 SLG 344 1994 SLD 344 1994 PLC 610
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-14 of 1993, decision dated: 9-03-1994
AGHA ALI HYDER, 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

LEVER BROTHERS PAKISTAN LIMITED, KARACHI

VS

Mrs. KISHWAR SULTANA KHAN

Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial disputeWorkmanEmployee though was reasonably well paid, but job she had performed day in and day out was nothing more than that of a clerkStatus of employee would be determined not only by pay and designation, but by duties and nature of job she was attending toEmployee in view of job she was attending to was a "workman". Hotel Intercontinental, Lahore v. Bashir A. Malik PLD 1986 SC 103 and Abdul Razzaq v. M/s, Ihsan Sons Ltd. and others 1992 SCMR 505 ref. (b) West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) S.O. 12(3)Termination of serviceNo explicit reason for termination of service of employee was given in termination orderEstablishment being an industrial establishment West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 was applicable to it­ Employer having failed to state reasons for termination of service of employee m violation of S.O. 12(3) of the Ordinance, 1968, order of termination could not be sustained. Ghulam Ahmad v. Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal 1990 PLC 385 and Muhammad Ishaque v. M/s. Shezan International 1990 PLC 63 ref. (c) Industrial dispute Full back benefit'sEntitlement toEmployee who was termination of service, had explicitly mentioned that she remained jobless during period of her terminationThat assertion of employee having not been disproved despite repeated efforts on part of employers, employee was rightly held entitled to full back benefits. Muhammad Bashir v. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal and others 1991 SCMR 2087 ref. DECISION This appeal calls in question the order of the Labour Court No. V, Karachi, whereby the -Petitioner came to be reinstated in service with full back benefit. The circumstances in which the appeal arises are as follows: The -Petitioner was appointed as a Secretary of the -Respondent company in the Secretariat Group against a salary of Rs.29,400 per annum. On the completion of the probationary period of 6 months, an agreement was executed, according to which she was to be paid Rs.30,876 per annum. She was working as the Confidential Secretary to the Business System Manager, when her services came to be terminated on…
🔒
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