| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 1832 2002 SLD 1832 2002 PLC 887 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 1412 to 1414 of 1999, heard on 1st October, 2001. (On appeal from judgment dated 15-6-1998 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in W.Ps. Nos. 11061 to 11063/1998).
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C.J., CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF AND QAZI MUHAMMAD FAROOQ, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeals Nos. 1412 to 1414 of 1999, heard on 1st October, 2001. (On appeal from judgment dated 15-6-1998 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in W.Ps. Nos. 11061 to 11063/1998).
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C.J., CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF AND QAZI MUHAMMAD FAROOQ, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others
VS
PUNJAB APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE and others
Law:
Section:
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial 'Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)-------S.Os.1(b) & 12---Permanent workman---Status---Determination of--Labour Court as well as Labour Appellate Tribunal of exclusive jurisdiction had recorded concurrent finding of fact that employees who continued in service for more than ninety days in posts of permanent nature, after expiry of said ninety days, had assumed the status of permanent workmen, not liable to be terminated without conforming with provisions of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 and that 70 permanent posts were still lying vacant in the Department---Such concurrent findings of fact were upheld by High Court---Fact that the salaries of the employees were not deducted for Fridays and other holidays showed uninterrupted continuity of their services making them distinguishable from the "work-charged employees "---Employees, in circumstances, could not be said to be ad hoc or temporary---In absence of any misreading or non-reading of evidence on record, of High Court not suffering from any legal infirmity could not be interfered with by Supreme Court in appeal. Ch. Arshad Ali, Advocate Supreme Court with Maroof Ahmed Assistant Executive Engineer and Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate On-Record for Appellants. Farooq Zaman Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 1st October, 2001. JUDGMENT IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C.J.---These three appeals, with leave of the Court, are directed against the judgment dated 15-6-1998 passed by a learned Judge in Chambers of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petitions Nos. 11061 to 11063 of 1998. 2. Succinctly stated, the facts, are that private respondents in the above appeals were 'Store Men' in the Central Store Division I.B. Canal Bank, Irrigation Department, Mughalpura, Lahore. They had seven to sixteen years' continuous service in their credit. 'Initially, all of them were recruited on temporary or ad hoc basis for a period of three months, though the post they held, were of permanent nature. After giving grievance notices to the appellant Department, they approached Punjab Labour…
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