| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 2903 2007 SLD 2903 2007 PLJ 476 |
Lahore High Court
L.A. No. 137 of 2003, heard on 6.4.2006.
SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BUKHARI, J.
Mr. Ghazi M. A. Rasheed, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Khadim Hussain Tahir, Advocate for respondent.
L.A. No. 137 of 2003, heard on 6.4.2006.
SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BUKHARI, J.
Mr. Ghazi M. A. Rasheed, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Khadim Hussain Tahir, Advocate for respondent.
Lahore DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through its Director GENERAL LDA Plaza, Lahore and 2 others
VS
AMANULLAH KHAN NIAZI (Ex.Sr. ACCOUNTANT)
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relation Ordinance, 1969 (XXIII of 1969)-- ----S. 25-A--If the work is not of permanent nature--The employee cannot be taken to be permanent workman--respondent was employed against the specific project (PUDP)--On the completion of work his services could be terminated by appellants--Appeal accepted. [P. 479] A Judgment This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18.10.1999 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore whereby grievance petition brought by respondent was accepted. 2. Relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are that Aman Ullah Khan Niazi (respondent) filed petition under Section 25-A of IRO 1969 and prayed for issuance of direction to the appellants to regularize his services and to pay him monthly wages (emoluments) w.e.f. 1.7.1997 and not to remove him from service. The respondent stated that he was employed in the LDA w.e.f. 16.04.1990 as Senior Accountant and thereafter promoted as Accounts Officer on 17.2.1991. The letter of promotion was accordingly issued on 26.10.1991. He was performing duty on the said post since 26.10.1991. The respondent averred that numerous persons of the same project (Punjab Urban Development Project) of the LDA were regularized and he also deserved, same treatment. Also that LDA Establishment, is busy in the business of construction of Roads/Buildings, Colonies and Bridges etc. and this business is of permanent nature. He stated that many employees of the same Project (PUDP) are given the salary from Director Admn. & Finance (TEPA) LDA. The appellants mentioned in reply that respondent was not workman/worker under the law. The appellants further mentioned that project has been closed on 31.07.1997. It was World Bank Project (PUDP), therefore, his right if any has extinguished. The appellants stated that respondent was appointed as Senior Accountant by Appellant No. 2 under World Bank Project (PUDP) and his post related to this specific project. The project having been closed since 31.07.1997., no payment was liable to be made and denied performance of his duty since 31.07.1997 on closure of the project. Learned trial Court recorded evidence and accepted 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