2008 PLP 18 (PLC)

MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J.

As the above said appeals arise out of the same order, those are being disposed of by this single judgment. Impugned in these appeals filed by the Management of Pakistan Herald Ltd. is order, dated 30-3-2004 passed by Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No.4, Karachi whereby he allowed grievance petitions filed by the workers for grant of move-over w. e. f. 1-7-1999.

2. Brief facts, as that the respondents being newspaper employees reached the maximum of pay scale in grade 1 on 30-6-1999 and completed one year satisfactory service in the same cadre, thus, became entitled for grant of move-over in the next higher grade on 1-7-1999, however, the Management informed the workers that their move-over had been deferred for one year as their performance was not found to be satisfactory. In the circumstances, respondent workers served grievance notice upon the Management, however, having received no positive reply, they filed grievance petitions before the Labour Court.

3. The appellant-Management contested the matter by filing written statement wherein they took a plea that as per para.73(i) of the Sixth Wage Board Award the criteria for grant of move-over to the employees was completion of one year service to the satisfaction of the employer and as the service of the respondent-workers was not found to be satisfactory, they were not entitled to move-over.

4. Both the parties adduced evidence. Labour Court after appraising the evidence on record and hearing the parties, allowed the grievance petitions and held that the respondent-workers are entitled to move-over with effect from 1-7-1999. Hence these appeals.

5. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard.'

6. It was contended on behalf of the Management that the move-over, increment and promotion are independent matter; that move-over as envisaged in clause 73(i) of the 6th Wage Board Award has no connection with the increment and promotion awarded to the employees during the course of their employment; and that the criteria for granting move-over to the employees was completion of one year satisfactory service, but as the Management was not satisfied with the performance of respondent-workers, they were rightly refused such benefit.

7. Conversely, learned counsel for the respondent-workers contended that clause (i) of para.73 of the Sixth Wage Board Award provides that any employee who reaches the maximum stage of his pay scale. after completion of one years' satisfactory service shall automatically move-over to the next higher grade and as there was nothing on the record to show that the performance or respondent-workers was not satisfactory, they automatically moved over to the next higher grade and the refusal to grant such benefit by the Management was violative of the said provision.

8. The arguments have been considered and the material placed on the record has been perused.

9. In order to appreciate the contentions advanced at the bar, it would be advantageous to reproduce hereunder the relevant provision of law viz. clause (i) of para.73 of the Sixth Wage Board Award:-- "Any employee who reaches the maximum stage of his pay scale applicable to the grade, after completion of one years' satisfactory service shall automatically move-over to the next higher grade, fixing his pay at such stage as falls next above his existing pay in the lower grade." From the perusal of above provision of law, it is clear that an employee after reaching the maximum stage of his pay scale after completing one year's service shall automatically become entitled to the grant of move-over to the next higher grade provided the employer is satisfied with his performance during the said one year service. Admittedly no material of whatsoever nature is available on the record to indicate that their performance was not satisfactory. On a query as to whether prior to refusal by the Management to grant move-over to the respondents, any warning, counseling or show-cause notice was issued thereby intimating them about unsatisfactory performance, the learned counsel for the Management could not point out any such material from the record. She repeatedly stressed upon the plea that the satisfaction for grant of move-over was that of the employer and that even after reaching the maximum stage of pay scale and completing one year's service, the employee would not be entitled to move-over unless the employer is satisfied with his performance and in the case in hand the Management being not satisfied with the performance of respondent-workers, rightly refused to grant move-over.

11. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent-workers pointed out that not only that the Management did not issue any warning or show-cause notice to the workers regarding their alleged unsatisfactory performance, but on the other hand the Management issued appreciation letters- to the workers Abrar Ahmed and Zaheer Siddiqui and considering their performance and evaluation report, raised their salary, however, strangely enough they were refused move-over. The learned counsel for the Management was not in a position to controvert such plea raised on behalf of the workers. It also appears that admittedly the respondent-workers were due for grant of move-over on 1-7-1999 but the Management kept mum for the whole month of July and August and in the end of September they came with a plea that as performance of the workers was not satisfactory, they were not entitled to move-over. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent-workers is not without force as there is nothing on the record to show that prior to issuance of letter, dated 25th September, 1999 whereby respondent-workers were refused move-over, the workers were at any point of time intimated about their unsatisfactory performance.

12. The upshot of above discussion is that the order impugned in these appeals being unexceptionable, needs no interference. The same is upheld. The appeals being without merit are dismissed. These are the reasons for short order dated 30-8-2007. H. B. T. /P-27/K Appeal dismissed.