1996 PLP 130 (PLC)
NAVEED KASIM Versus FAROOQ KHAN
| Citation | 1996 PLP 130 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | NAVEED KASIM Versus FAROOQ KHAN |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 130 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 PLP 130 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 130 (PLC) (NAVEED KASIM Versus FAROOQ KHAN). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.M. Jeelani for Appellant.
- Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 22nd November, 1995.
- 2. It is the case of the Textile Mills that they were small concern employing less than 20 persons and the Standing Orders Ordinance does not apply to their case. That they were governed by the Shops Act. The learned Advocate has pointed out that he had filed the list of workers in the lower Court. This list has been found in the Labour Court's record. Thirteen workers are shown in the list.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 25-A
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 1(4)(a)
Grievance petition-- Maintainability
Ex parte order according to which grievance petition filed by employee against termination of his service was accepted by Labour Court was challenged by employer Mills contending that they were small concern employing less than twenty persons and thus West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 was not applicable to them
Employer had filed list of workers in Labour Court showing thirteen workers
Case was remanded to Labour Court for fresh trial after hearing parties and recording evidence produced by them.
Judgment & Decree
M.M. Jeelani for Appellant. Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for Respondent. Date of hearing: 22nd November, 1995. The respondent was working as a helper in the Appellant Textile Industry. His services were alleged to have been terminated without an order in writing giving reasons. He filed grievance petition before the Second Sindh Labour Court, Karachi. The petition was heard and decided ex parte and the same was allowed.
2. It is the case of the Textile Mills that they were small concern employing less than 20 persons and the Standing Orders Ordinance does not apply to their case. That they were governed by the Shops Act. The learned Advocate has pointed out that he had filed the list of workers in the lower Court. This list has been found in the Labour Court's record. Thirteen workers are shown in the list.
3. In the interest of justice the case is accordingly remanded to the Labour Court for a fresh trial after hearing both the sides and recording the evidence produced by them. Case remanded. H.B.T./2556/Lb.S Order accordingly.