1996 PLP 335 (PLC(CS))
Present: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD through Chief Manager, Karachi Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, SINDH LABOUR COURT NO. VII, SUKKUR and another
| Citation | 1996 PLP 335 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD through Chief Manager, Karachi |
| Parties | Present: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD through Chief Manager, Karachi Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, SINDH LABOUR COURT NO. VII, SUKKUR and another |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 335 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 PLP 335 (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD through Chief Manager, Karachi.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 335 (PLC(CS)) (Present: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD through Chief Manager, Karachi Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, SINDH LABOUR COURT NO. VII, SUKKUR and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Nemo for Appellant.
- Muhammad Ashraf Khan for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 12th December, 1995.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)
S.O. 12
Employee who was appointed as Assistant for a period of six months, continued in service even after six months and after more than eight months from his appointment his services were terminated with immediate effect without mentioning any reason for his termination-- Termination of services-of employee without giving explicit reasons, was void being against mandatory requirements of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968
Employee, thus, was rightly re-instated by Labour Court with full back benefits.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.O. 12‑‑‑Termination of service‑‑‑Employee who was appointed as Assistant for a period of six months, continued in service even after six months and after more than eight months from his appointment his services were terminated with immediate effect without mentioning any reason for his termination‑‑ Termination of services‑of employee without giving explicit reasons, was void being against mandatory requirements of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968‑‑‑Employee, thus, was rightly re‑instated by Labour Court with full back benefits. Nemo for Appellant. Muhammad Ashraf Khan for Respondents. Date of hearing: 12th December, 1995. This appeal arises from order of the 7th Sindh Labour Court, Sukkur, whereby the petitioner/respondent was re‑instated in service of the Gas Company the appellants with full back benefits.
2. The facts in brief are that by an order dated 18‑4‑1990 the respondent was appointed as Assistant on basic salary of Rs.900 per month for a period of six months. The respondent however continued in service even after six months and by letter dated 25‑2‑1991 his services were terminated with immediate effect without mentioning any reasons for termination. This termination was effected under Order 12(3) of the Standing Orders Ordinance and it was imperative that explicit reasons for termination had to be given. Nature of appointment as ad hoc is not mentioned in the Standing Orders Ordinance. At the nest he could be termed temporary if the nature of appointment was not permanent. Even in case of temporary worker Order 12(3) is made applicable. The termination is therefore void being against requirements of the Standing Orders The respondent has also stated that he was without any job subsequent to his termination. There is thus hardly any reason for interference of the order of the Labour Court, which is maintained and the appeal is dismissed. H.B.T./13/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.