1989 PLP 489 (PLC)
Messrs PAK CONTAINERS EMPLOYEES' UNION through its General Secretary. Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, III and another
| Citation | 1989 PLP 489 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Haider Ali Pirzada, J |
| Parties | Messrs PAK CONTAINERS EMPLOYEES' UNION through its General Secretary. Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, III and another |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 489 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 489 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Haider Ali Pirzada, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 489 (PLC) (Messrs PAK CONTAINERS EMPLOYEES' UNION through its General Secretary. Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, III and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ali Amjad for Appellant.
- Mohsin Tayabali for Respondents.
- Dates of hearing: 19th and 23rd January, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)‑‑ ‑‑‑S.O. 11‑A‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R. 11‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑Termination of services of employees by employer‑ Subsequent application by employer under S.O. 11‑A of Ordinance VI of 1968‑ Employees filed application for rejection of employer's application‑‑Labour Court rejected employee's application for rejection of employer's application‑ Order impugned in Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑Both parties to Constitutional petition filed joint statement in Court stating therein that the impugned order be set aside and case be remanded to Labour Court for deciding the legal objections raised by employees by taking into consideration amended S.O. 11‑A of the Ordinance, in .accordance with law, alongwith the main `application‑ Constitutional petition was thus disposed of in accordance with terms of agreement.
Judgment & Decree
This petition is directed against the order, dated 7‑5‑1988 passed by the first respondent whereby the application for rejection was dismissed. The facts leading to the filing of the above petition are that the petitioner is a General Secretary of C.B.A. Union of the second respondent. The second respondent terminated services of all its workmen numbering 120 on or about 18th February, 1988. Subsequently the second respondent filed an application under 11(A) before the 1st respondent. The petitioners filed application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. praying for rejection of the application on the ground that the second ‑respondent has already terminated the services of all the workmen and closed down the whole of its establishment without the prior permission of the Labour Court and the Labour Court did not have any jurisdiction to confer legality post facto to any legal act. The second respondent after hearing the arguments of the counsel for the parties dismissed the application by the impugned order dated 7‑5‑1988 as stated in earlier part of this judgment. The petitioner being aggrieved against the order has filed the present petition. ' I have heard Mr. Ali Amjad in support of the petition. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner at length both the learned counsel for the parties have filed a joint statement stating therein that the order, dated 7‑5‑1988 be set aside and the case be remanded to second respondent. It is advantageous to reproduce the statement which reads:‑ "It is agreed by the parties that this Hon'ble Court may set aside the orders of the IIIrd Sind Labour Court Karachi, dated 7‑5‑1988 impugned in the present petition and to remand the case to the Labour Court for deciding the legal objections raised by the petitioner after taking into consideration the amendment brought in Standing Order 11‑A of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 by virtue of Act XI of 1976 and to also decide the main application by 1st February, 1989." I think the request is just and proper in the circumstances of the case. The petition is allowed and impugned order dated 7‑5‑1988 is set aside. The second respondent is directed to decide the legal objections raised by the petitioner after taking into consideration the amendment brought in Standing Orders 11‑A of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 in accordance with law alongwith the main application as well as legal objections on or before 1st February, 1989. Petition No. S‑60 of 1988 is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. A.A./P‑93/K Order accordingly.