| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 1644 2000 SLD 1644 2000 PLC 423 |
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No. D 1235 of 1994, decision dated: 26-05-1999, hearing DATE : 21st May, 1999
MUHAMMAD ROSHAN ESSANI AND S.A. RABBANI, JJ
S. Ahmed Faruqi AND Nemo Nos. 1 and 2. Shabbir Ahmed Awan Nos.3 to 10
Constitutional Petition No. D 1235 of 1994, decision dated: 26-05-1999, hearing DATE : 21st May, 1999
MUHAMMAD ROSHAN ESSANI AND S.A. RABBANI, JJ
S. Ahmed Faruqi AND Nemo Nos. 1 and 2. Shabbir Ahmed Awan Nos.3 to 10
KARIM BUX SANGRI and 4 others
VS
CHAIRMAN, SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KARACHI and 9 others
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) S. 25 A Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.2 A Grievance petition Maintainability Petitioners who were "guards" in Pakistan Railways had filed grievance petition in which they had raised dispute relating to their seniority Petitioners being employees of Railways, having been treated in Service of Pakistan under S.2 A of Service Tribunals Act, 1973, remedy for their grievance lay before Service Tribunal and not before Labour Court Grievance petition filed by petitioner was not maintainable. 1999 SCMR 197 ref. JUDGMENT S.A. RABBANI, J. Petitioners are Guards in Pakistan Railways promoted to the post from lower ranks. They have a dispute relating to their seniority vis a vis the direct recruits in the cadre. They claimed that by virtue of nature of their duties they are workmen as defined in Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 and Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, and they filed Grievance Application No.5 of 1989 before Sindh Labour Court at Sukkur. The application was decided in their favour but on appeals by the respondents, the case was remanded to the Sindh Labour Court Sukkur by the Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal. In the second round, both the application, as well as appeal, were dismissed by the Labour Court and the Tribunal. Petitioners, therefore, filed this petition for relief under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and respondents Nos.6, 8 to 10. The learned counsel for the petitioners tried to point out weaknesses and flaws in the impugned order of Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal and contended that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the decisions of the Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that it is a service matter and after the amendment, inserting section 2 A in Service Tribunal Act, 1973, made on 10 6 1996, the Service Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate upon it. In…
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