| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 1609 2000 SLD 1609 2000 PLC 292 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Revisions Nos.Hyd 127 of 1997, Hyd 82, Hyd 83, Hyd 84, Hyd 85, Hyd 87, Hyd 119 of 1999. dates of hearing: 25th and 27-10-1999
DR. TANZIL UR REHMAN, CHAIRMAN
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Revisions Nos.Hyd 127 of 1997, Hyd 82, Hyd 83, Hyd 84, Hyd 85, Hyd 87, Hyd 119 of 1999. dates of hearing: 25th and 27-10-1999
DR. TANZIL UR REHMAN, CHAIRMAN
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Messrs HYDARI INDUSTRIES LTD. Through Director Operation
VS
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and 29 others
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) Ss. 38(3 a) & 51 Payment of amount under settlement Revision petition Workers of factory, on its privatization having protested, an agreement was arrived at between Government and said workers Main purpose of said agreement was to safeguard the interest of workers When workers were relieved from their jobs under a Golden Hand Shake Scheme, management of factory agreed to pay dues to workers as determined and specified in said agreement Cheques issued to workers in respect of payment of dues were dishonoured whereupon workers filed application under S.51 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 before Labour Court for payment of said amount which application was allowed Management in its revision petition against order of Labour Court had contended that the application was not maintainable as there was neither any agreement nor award of decision of Arbitrator or of Labour Court or Labour Appellate . Tribunal on basis of which the application could be filed by workers Contention of management was repelled as there were more than one settlement, arrived at between workers and management as well as workers and management through conciliator and amounts payable to workers were fully determined Revision against order of Labour Court, being miscoqceived, was dismissed accordingly. Avalene Silk Mills v. Second Sindh Labour Court, Karachi and 7 others 1981 PLC 4; Siemens (Pakistan) Employees' Union v. Siemens (Pakistan) Engineering Company and 2 others 1969 PLC 341; Hostellarie -De France Staff and Workers' Union v. Messrs Hostellarie De France 1983 PLC 1995 and Messrs Pfizer Laboratories Ltd. and another v. Irfan Ahmed 1999 PLC 391 ref. ORDER These are thirty one revision applications against thirty workers, filed separately, against the order, dated 30th July, 1997, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No.VI at Hyderabad, whereby he allowed the applications under section 51 of I.R.O., 1969, made by the respondents (hereinafter referred to as "the workers") ordering the applicants (hereinafter referred to as "the management") to make payments to the workers, as prayed for in their application. 2.…
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