PLC(CS) 1996

1996 PLP 303 (PLC(CS))

Messrs KATREX SILK MILLS LIMITED, KARACHI and 3 others Versus Sheikh GULZAR and others

Jurisdiction / Court
Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh
Decided Date
Appeals Nos. KAR-181 and 188 of 1995, decided on 14th January, 1996.
Honorable Judges
Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1996 PLP 303 (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh
Bench Members Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal
Parties Messrs KATREX SILK MILLS LIMITED, KARACHI and 3 others Versus Sheikh GULZAR and others
Primary Law Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 303 (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 PLP 303 (PLC(CS))?

The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 303 (PLC(CS)) (Messrs KATREX SILK MILLS LIMITED, KARACHI and 3 others Versus Sheikh GULZAR and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)

Representation

  • Date of hearing: 14th January, 1996.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 25-A

Termination of service

Re-instatement

Employees whose services were orally terminated were ordered to be re-instated in service by Labour Court without allowing them back benefits

Order of re-instatement was challenged by employer contending that employees were appointed by Contractor

Evidence on record had proved that neither there was any contractor nor any intermediary and that according to Wage Registers produced on record wages were directly paid to employees by the employer

Employees, thus were rightly re-instated by Labour Court and back benefits were also rightly denied to employees as same neither were claimed by them in their grievance petition nor in affidavits. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Khan for the Management. Muhammad Shafiq Qureshi for the Workers.

Judgment & Decree

Muhammad Shafiq Qureshi for the Workers. Date of hearing: 14th January, 1996. These are two cross‑appeals arising from the order of Second Sindh Labour Court, Karachi whereby the grievance petitions of the workers were allowed for re‑instatement but not for the payment of back benefits.

2. Sheikh Gulzar and Yaqoob Ahmed were employed as weavers in the Powerloom Factory of M/s. Katrex Silk Mills Ltd. on daily wages of Rs.70 per day. Since the workers were made to work for 12 hours daily they claimed overtime allowance but though promised it was not paid. Without issuing any termination letters the workers were locked out. The workers filed their grievance petitions but it was contended by the management that the weaving job in the Factory had been given on contract and the workers were employed by the Contractor.

3. The learned Labour Court however found that there was no Contractor or any intermediary and the wages were paid directly by the management. The Wages Registers have been produced. The workers were thus orally terminated and the learned Labour Court ordered their re‑instatement in service within 30 days. No back benefits were however allowed to the workers as the same were not claimed in the grievance petitions or in the affidavits. Their claim for overtime was also found to be time‑barred and vague. Hence claim was rejected.

4. I have heard Ch. Muhammad Ashraf for the mills and Mr. Shafiq Qureshi for the workers. I find the order of the Labour Court to be reasonable and proper and cannot find any ground for interference with the findings.

5. There is no substance in these appeals which are accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./34/Lb.S Appeals dismissed.