200,1 PLP 196 (PLC)

Shahid Anwar Bajwa for Applicant. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 21st October, 2000. The present revision petition which has been filed by Muslim Commercial Bank, Sukkut has been preferred from the short order, dated 4‑1‑2000 of Labour Court No.7 of Sukkur, whereby the Bank's prayer that legal objections involved in the case should be decided first was turned down.

2. I have heard the Bank's learned counsel at length and have also perused the relevant documents available ' in the case file. However, the respondent Ghous Bux was called absent though as per record notice was obviously served on him. A litigation between the parties started with filing of civil suit by respondent Ghous Bux in the Court of Senior Civil Judge Thari' Mirwah. He prayed for' declaration that termination of his services by the Bank was void ab initio and also for issuance of necessary injunction. In course of the suit proceedings applications was moved on behalf of the Bank that since the relationship between the parties was of master and servant, the plaint be rejected. However, application was dismissed by the Trial Court whereupon revision application was filed in the District Court Khairpur which was ultimately decided by the Additional District Judge of the said Court. The revision application was allowed by the Additional District Judge. His order was challenged in High Court, Sukkur Bench which by its order, dated 30‑9‑1999 confirmed the impugned judgment of the Additional District Judge.

3. After having failed to get the desired relief from Civil Courts the respondent Ghous Bux filed grievance petition under section 25‑A, I.R.O. in the Labour Court No.7 of Sukkur. It was contended on behalf of the Bank that inter alia three legal issues if decided first would dispose the pending grievance petition completely. According to learned counsel three legal issues are :‑‑ firstly that since the relationship between the parties is of master and servant, the Labour Court has no jurisdiction to decide the case; secondly that grievance .petition is barred by limitation; and thirdly the pending .petition of the respondent Ghous Bux is also barred by principle of res judicata. .

4. As regards the first legal issue the learned counsel for the Bank invited my attention to the judgment of the High Court Sukkur Bench whereby it was confirmed that the relationship of the parties was of master and servant. The respondent Ghous Bux did not challenge the said order of the High Court and therefore it attained finality. As regards the second legal objection of limitation it was to be considered by the Labour Court when the cause of action accrued to the respondent Ghous Bux and whether his petition filed in the Labour Court has also to consider the applicability of principle of res judicata in as such as that before approaching the Labour Court the respondents case was decided by the Civil Courts.

5. From the above perusal I am convinced that the aforesaid three legal issues raised by the Bank cut at the roat of the case and, therefore, here is a lot of force in the contentions raised by the Bank's learned counsel that the said three issues should be decided first before proceeding with the case on merits. I may also add here that for taking decision on the said issues no evidence was to be led by the parties and the same could be decided on the basis of the material available on record. Accordingly the revision application is allowed aid the case is remanded back to the Sindh Labour Court No.7 of Sukkur for taking decision in terms of this order. H.B.T./32/K (Lab. Trib) ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Revision allowed.