Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----S.25-A---Leave salary and pension contribution---Respondent originally was employee of WAPDA, sent on deputation to appellant Company on condition that leave salary and pension contribution would be paid by latter---Respondent who was repartiated back to WAPDA filed application before Labour Court for direction to appellant to pay said amount---Labour Court allowed application of respondent and appellant contended that they had already sent said payment to WAPDA but due to mistake in telex message respondent was not stated to be their employee--Mistake in telex message was corrected through another telex message---Terms and conditions in the agreement reached between appellant and WAPDA also revealed that amount of leave salary and pension contribution was to be paid by appellant to WAPDA who would pay to respondents in accordance with their service rules---Respondent held, was entitled to benefits accruing to him under the rules. Date of hearing: 29th January, 1990. DECISION This is an appeal against the order of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No. I at Karachi, dated 31-7-1989. 2. The brief facts of the case are, that the respondents were originally employees of the WAPDA, who were sent on deputation to the appellants. In 1985 the establishment of the appellants was winded up and the respondents were repatriated back to WAPDA. Admittedly under the decision of the Government the leave salary and pension contributions in respect of the respondents were payable by the appellants. The respondents, therefore, filed an application before the learned Labour Court claiming the payment of leave salary and pension contribution whereas according to the appellants, which fact is not disputed, they have sent those contributions to the WAPDA for payment to the respondents. However, the learned Labour Court allowed the application of the respondents for payment of the above benefits directly to the respondents. 3. I have heard Mr. Mazhar Ali Chohan, learned Advocate for the appellants and Mr. S.P. Lodhi, learned representative for the respondent. Mr. Lodhi states that respondents Nos. 2 to 15 have not…

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