Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1410 2004 SLD 1410 2004 PLC 82
Quetta High Court
Labour Appeal No.2 of 1998, decision dated: 7-10-2003.
MUHAMMAD NADIR KHAN, J

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

PIONEER CABLES LIMITED

VS

PRESIDING OFFICER, BALOCHISTAN LABOUR COURT No.3 and another

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-------S.25-A---West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.O. 13---Termination of service---Grievance petition---Charge of wilful absence from duty--­Labour Court accepted petition of employee and reinstated him in service, which was upheld by Appellate Tribunal---High Court accepted Constitutional petition of employer and remanded case to Tribunal---Employer filed amended memo. of appeal incorporating additional grounds with regard to financial losses incurred by Organization resulting into retrenchment of several employees---Plea of employee was that his services had been terminated on account of mala fide as he was active member of Labour Union---Employee could not support such plea as he had resigned from such position prior to his removal from service---Duty of employee was to make out a case as to how his services were terminated for any other reason---Labour Court had not considered such aspect of the case---Controversy between parties required detailed probe, which could only be done , by providing opportunity to both parties to establish their respective pleas by adducing evidence---High Court set aside impugned and remanded case to Labour Court for its decision afresh in the light of above observations. PLD 1965 SC 690 rel. Mehmood Abdul Ghani for Appellant K.N. Kohli for Respondents. Date of hearing: 3rd June, 2003. JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the order dated 30-12-1997 passed by Presiding Officer, 3rd Labour Court Balochistan Kalat/Mekran Division at Hub, whereby the application filed by the respondent under section 25-A of the I.R.O. was allowed. The order dated 26-4-1997 passed by the appellant terminating the services of the respondent, was setaside and he was reinstated with all the back-benefits. Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondent (hereinafter referred .to as applicant/worker] submitted application against the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the employer) under section 25-A of the I.R.O. contending that the applicant was appointed as helper since, 10-8-1994. He was an active trade union worker believing in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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