1998 PLP 52 (PLC)

S.O. 12

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25-A-- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199

Constitutional petition-- Workman

Termination of services on account of re-organisation of respondent's industry whereby 8 persons were retrenched

Validity-- Termination of workman could not be deemed to be violative of S.O. 12, West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968

Labour Appellate Tribunal in view of admitted facts, had also found that workman had also attained age of superannuation on specified date though his services were terminated about one and half months after the date of his superannuation, thus, workman could not be said to have right to stay in Department considering the fact that he would get all benefits of his retirement as well as legal dues on his termination

Termination order having not been shown to be either mala fide or without lawful authority, no case for interference in Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court was made out. Faiz Ghangro for Petitioner. S.M Yaqoob for Respondent No.

2. This petition is directed against the order dated 1-9-1996 passed by Chairman, Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal at Karachi in Appeal No.KAR-28 of 1996 Ahmad Food Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Mukhtar Hussain Bokhari whereby the order dated 18-1-1996 passed by III-Sindh Labour Court. Karachi was set aside maintaining the order of termination of the petitioner with the directions to return the back benefits if deposited with the Tribunal after settling the dues of the petitioner in respect of termination as well as retirement. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Establishment Assistant on probation on 1-9-1988 by the respondent No. 2 who continued to serve till 13th May, 1991 when the petitioner's services were terminated with effect from 14-5-1991 on the ground of abolition of the post of Assistant in the establishment department. The petitioner served grievance notice upon the respondent No.- 2 on 8-7-1991 but the petitioner's grievance was turned down hence the petitioner filed an application under section 25-A of I.R.O., 1969 before the III-Sindh Labour Court, Karachi. Where after recording the evidence of the parties and hearing the counsel, the application of the petitioner was allowed with full back benefits. The respondent No. 2 filed an appeal before the Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi which was heard and allowed as per impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed that three private companies Ahmad Karachi Halwa Merchant, Naurus (Pvt.) Limited and Ahmad Food Industries were de-registered and merged into one company Ahmad Food Industries on 17-2-1991 and computerised system of administration was introduced by respondent No. 2 on 13-5-1991, so also that the petitioner has been paid all his legal dues including one month's pay to lieu of the notice, which fact was mentioned in the letter of termination that the petitioner's services were terminated because of re-organisation of respondent No. 2's industry whereby as many as eight persons were retrenched on account of computerization scheme introduced by respondent No.2. The termination of the petitioner in the said circumstances could not be said to be violative of section 12 of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968. The learned Tribunal casually in the alternative, in view of admitted facts observed that the petitioner had also attained the age of superannuation on 31-3-1991 though his services were terminated about one and half months after the date of his superannuation hence petitioner could not be said to have right to stay in the department considering the fact that the petitioner would get the all benefits of his retirement as well and other legal dues on his termination. Nothing has been shown whereby termination order of the petitioner passed by respondent No. 2 could be said to be mala fide or without lawful authority. No case for interference in the writ jurisdiction has been made out hence the petition is dismissed in limine alongwith the listed application. These are the reasons for the dismissal of petition announced as per short order on 3-9-1997. A.A./M-218/K Petition dismissed.