| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1993 SLG 1168 1993 SLD 1168 1993 PLC 142 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-413 of 1991, decided on 31st August, 1.992.
AGHA ALI HYDER, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. KAR-413 of 1991, decided on 31st August, 1.992.
AGHA ALI HYDER, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MANZOOR AHMED SALEEMI
VS
OLYMPIA SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS LTD., KARACHI
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)---- ----S. 25-A---West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 1(4)(a)---Grievance petition, maintainability of---Employer had fully established by filing list of employees that number of employees working under him were less than twenty--Relationship of employer and employee did not exist between the parties at relevant time---Grievance petition was rightly dismissed, in circumstances, being not maintainable. Raja Shams-uz-Zaman for Appellant. Syed Zamirul Hassan for Respondent. Date of hearing: 26th August, 1992. DECISION The circumstances in which this appeal has arisen are as follows: 2. The appellant alleges that he was employed by M/s. Olympia Silk Mills on 6-7-1966 and worked there upto 19-9-1970, when he was transferred to the Head Office of the respondent establishment---the respondents owned a chain of factories. On 7-6-1990, however, his services were terminated verbally. He gave the grievance notices on 25-8-1990 to the Head Office and also to the Silk Mills. The latter was returned undelivered while the former was served. Not receiving any reply to the notice he was constrained to file the grievance petition. 3. In the written reply filed by the respondents the relationship of employer and employee came to be denied, and so also the receipt of the notice. It was further alleged that the factory in question had been closed in 1989 and the petitioner had nothing to do with the Head Office as alleged, otherwise too the number of employees there being within twenty, the Standing Orders Ordinance did not apply. 4. The appellant appeared as his own witness and one Anwar Saigal, the Chief Accountant, appeared on behalf of the respondents. The learned Presiding Officer found that the service of the grievance notice was not proved, the provisions of Standing Orders Ordinance were not applicable to the respondent establishment and the case as set up by the petitioner was false as there was no proof that he had ever at all been employed by the respondents. 5. Adverting to the service of the grievance notice it is to be seen that the one despatched with the…
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