Case Details

Citation(s)
1997 SLG 879 1997 SLD 879 1997 PLC 602
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. 6 of 1997, decision dated: 3rd March, 1997.
MIAN GHULAM AHMAD, CHAIRMAN

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

GENERAL MANAGER, HYESONS SUGAR MILLS, KHANPUR

VS

SARDAR AHMAD

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)S. 25AWest Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.O. 13Retrenchment­Services of employee were terminated by employer through retrenchment as the same had been rendered surplus in consequence of reorganisation­Record reveals that employer was facing real financial difficultiesRight of employer to reduce number of workers in view of financial constraints, thus could not be disputedEmployee having failed to establish that employer had resorted to "pick and choose" and victimisation in the process of retrenchment, assertion of employees that they were made victim of vengeance and the exercise was undertaken by employer to deprive them of their annually calculated amenities, could not be believed, in circumstancesOrders terminating services of employees were maintained. Ch. M. Ikram Zahid for the Mill Management. Javed Jalal for the Employees. Date of hearing: 3rd March, 1997. JUDGMENT By the present judgment are proposed to be disposed of 91 appeals (8 Appeals Nos. 6 to 13 of 1997) having been filed by the mill management against the employees, Sardar Ahmad and others, and 83 Appeals Nos. 16 to 98 of 1997, having conversely been preferred by Sardar Ahmad etc. employees against the mill management. Proceedings of the grievance petitions, filed by the employees under section 25A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, in the learned Labour Court at Bahawalpur, were consolidated, and a common judgment was delivered, accepting the grievance petitions, excepting, of course, the claims of the employees as regards their back benefits. Sardar Ahmad etc. employees have, by filing counter appeals, laid claims to back benefits as well. 2. Services of the employees were terminated by the mill management through retrenchment, as they had been rendered surplus in consequence of reorganisation. The employees, however, maintained that this could not be done, as they had become permanent and their services could not be dispensed with, in the summary manner it was done. They were ousted from service allegedly in an illegal, as also mala fide, manner, as persons even junior to them were…
🔒
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