| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 1265 1998 SLD 1265 = 1998 PLC 191 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 644 of 1986, decision dated: 5-12-1997.
SHEIKH AMJAD ALI, J
Writ Petition No. 644 of 1986, decision dated: 5-12-1997.
SHEIKH AMJAD ALI, J
GENERAL MANAGER/S.A.A. PAKISTAN ORDNANCE FACTORY, WAH CANTT.vsASHIQ HUSSAIN and 2 others
Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance, (XXIII of 1969)
Section: 1(3)(a) & 25-A
Law: Pakistan Essential Services (Maintenance) Act, 1952
Section: 3
Law: West Pakistan Commercial and Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968
Section: 12(3)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)----- Ss. 1(3)(a) & 25-A---Pakistan Essential Services (Maintenance) Act (LIII of 1952), S. 3---West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.O. 12(3)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Provisions of S. 1(3)(a), Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 explicitly exclude Ordnance Factories from applicability of the Ordinance---Where worker of Ordnance Factory was dismissed from service, he was not entitled to file grievance application in terms of S: 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969---Even if grievance application could be moved under West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, notwithstanding that Pakistan Essential Services (Maintenance) Act, 1952, provided protection to employment of any organisation, grievance application of its employee would have to be moved to Court established under Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, which was specifically not applicable to employees of Ordnance Factories---Labour Courts established under Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, would, thus, have no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon grievance of employees of Ordnance Factories---Labour Court and Labour Appellate Tribunal had wrongly �assumed jurisdiction for determining vires of dismissal of respondent from service of Ordnance Factory--- Employee, however, was advised to move application/representation before appropriate Authority and place his view�point before that Authority if he felt that he was not given opportunity of being heard---Order of re-instatement, in service of employee was set aside in circumstances.Security Paper Limited v. Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal PLD 1988 SC 180; Mumtaz Ali v. Chairman, N.-W.F.P. Labour Appellate Tribunal, Peshawar and 2 others 1995 PLC 738 and Pakistan Television Corporation v. M. Babar Zaman and others 1989 SCMR 1549 ref.Ch. Afrasiab Khan for Petitioner.Ch. Sadiq Muhammad Warraich for Respondents.Date of hearing: 26th November, 1997.JUDGMENT By this Constitutional petition the General Manager/S.A.A., Pakistan Ordnance Factories, Wah…