| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1997 SLG 665 1997 SLD 665 1997 PLC 208 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeals Nos. KAR-68 to KAR-70 of 1996, decision dated: 22-04-1996.
MUSHTAQ ALI KAZI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeals Nos. KAR-68 to KAR-70 of 1996, decision dated: 22-04-1996.
MUSHTAQ ALI KAZI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
PAKISTAN STEEL MILLS through Incharge Law, Karachi and 4 others
VS
SHAH AZMAT and others
Law:
Section:
(a) West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)S.Os. 1(b) & 12Termination of service ReinstatementValidityService of employee was terminated verbally without order in writing giving explicit reasons for such termination on plea that his service was no more requiredEmployee worked for about seven years as Mechanical Fitter in Mechanical Department which was a permanent Department and employer had failed to prove that employee was a daily wage workerService of employee having been terminated in violation of provisions of S.O. 12(3) of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, he was rightly ordered to be reinstated by Labour Court. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) S. 51Back benefitsEntitlementEmployee who was ordered to be reinstated without awarding back benefits, had himself admitted in his evidence that he was employed as a seller of old clothes during the time he was not employed by employerEmployee, in circumstances, could not claim back benefits because he was gainfully employed during period of his termination. Miss Rukhsana Ahmed for the Pakistan Steel Mills. Gohar lqbal for the Worker. Date of hearing: 22nd April, 1996. DECISION These are three connected appeals against the order of the Fourth 'Sindh Labour Court, Karachi whereby the appellant was declared to be a permanent worker and termination of his service verbally was found to be illegal and he was therefore directed to be reinstated in service but without back benefits because he had deposed that he was not jobless, he was selling old clothes. The third appeal by the same worker is for the back benefits. 2. It is the case of the respondent that he was working in the Steel Mills as Mechanical Fitter from 1321984 to 1611991 for seven years when his services were verbally terminated on the plea hat they were no longer required. The termination of 2211992 was set aside by the Labour Court because the order was not in writing and explicit reasons for termination were not given as required under Order 12(3) of the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968. The respondent worker was however…
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