1997 PLP 466 (PLC)

Ashfaq Rizvi for Respondent. Date of hearing: 27th October, 1996. These are appeals of 23 workers of Pak Saudi Fertilizers Limited, Canteen arising from a decision of Sindh Labour Court No. VII, Sukkur, dismissing their petitions for relief of reinstatement and back benefits.

2. The facts of this case are more or less admitted. The appellant workers and one or two others were working as cooks, bearers plate washers and waiters in the Canteen of the Fertilizer Factory which had been given on contract to Ghulam Farid & Company Canteen Contractors. They were to supply the food stuff to about 650 workers of the Fertilizer Factory. The workers of the Canteen presented their Charter of Demands to the Canteen Contractor through their General Secretary Allah Wadhayo. The Contractor, it appears got rid off the services of the appellants and appointed other persons in their place from outside. The workers of the Canteen made representation to the N.I.R.C. that they were being removed because they had raised an industrial dispute and this was an unfair labour practice. The N.I.R.C., however, dismissed their representation. These workers of the Canteen had their own C.B.A. who was different from the C.B.A. of the factory workers union that would show that the Canteen had no connection with the workers union and the Canteen was a separate and distinct entity working under a Contractor.

3. It has also been admitted that these 23 workers had no proof of their employment as workers in the factory. They can neither produce appointment orders nor termination orders nor they can show their job description and Wage Card. They have only got a Security Pass which is necessary in these days for any person who visits the factory. 4 In evidence an application by the General Secretary Allah Wadhayo Lashari has been produced, in which it is stated that it had been resolved that the "Contractor" of the Canteen may be presented the "Charter of Demands" for consideration. Unfortunately the Contractor is not a party in these proceedings while Mr. Muhammad Shafiq Qureshi contends that Canteen was part of the factory and workers of the Canteen were workers in the factory.

5. Ashfaq Rizvi for the. Fertilizers 'Limited has taken the stand that the Company has nothing to do with the Canteen workers, who are under the control of the Contractor. The Labour Court in the decision has also come to the conclusion that there is no relationship of employer and employee between the appellants and Pak Saudi Fertilizers Limited. The appellants were employees of the Contractor. Neither any appointment order is produced nor any other tangible evidence has been brought on record except the Security Pass. That even the N.I.R.C. dismissed their petitions and the order has attained finality. The burden is on the workers to show that they were workers of the Fertilizers Factory Limited. These workers were admittedly retrenched by the Contractor who was not impleaded as a party. They are said to have been directly recruited by the factory according to the appellants but for that no proof has been forthcoming.

6. The order of the Labour Court appears to be reasonable and proper and I can find no reason for interference with that order. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed. H.B.T./194/Lb.S Appeals dismissed.