2014 PLP 416 (PLC)
INDEPENDENT MEDIA CORPORATION (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Operating Officer and 2 others Versus SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and another
| Citation | 2014 PLP 416 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh High Court |
| Bench Members | Faisal Arab and Shaukat Ali Memon, JJ |
| Parties | INDEPENDENT MEDIA CORPORATION (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Operating Officer and 2 others Versus SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and another |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 416 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 PLP 416 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh High Court bench comprising: Faisal Arab and Shaukat Ali Memon, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 416 (PLC) (INDEPENDENT MEDIA CORPORATION (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Operating Officer and 2 others Versus SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mehmood Abdul Ghani for Petitioner.
- M.A.K. Azmati for Respondent No.2.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 2(xxxii) & 33
Applicant/employee who was working initially with "C Limited" claimed that after his appointment, he was treated to be in the employment of "I Limited" and both companies were part of "J Group of Companies"
Employee had admitted that his case was against "C Limited"
Both companies were private limited companies, and when the grievance application was filed before the Labour Court, none of those companies were made party and only Directors and Managers had been sued
Employee ought to have sued the Companies as well, which were independent juristic entities
Employee being a 'workman', instead of nullifying whole proceedings, while setting aside the judgments of both courts below, High Court directed the employee to file amended title, impleading both the companies as party and thereafter fresh notice would be issued by the Labour Court, on their addressees; and after the defence that could be set up by such Companies, the Labour Court would dispose of the matter in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
Respondent No.2 who was working initially with Combined Media (Pvt.) Limited claims that he was appointed on 1-1-2001 and thereafter he was treated to be in the employ of Independent Media Corporation (Pvt.) Limited and both companies are part of Jang Group of Companies. This has also come in the cross-examination wherein the respondent No.2 has admitted that his case is against Combined Media Private Limited. Both companies are private limited companies and when the grievance application was filed before the Labour Court none of these companies were made party and only Directors and Managers have been sued. We are of the view that respondent No.2 ought to have sued private limited companies as well which are independent juristic entities. Since respondent No.2 is a workman therefore instead of nullifying whole proceedings we while setting aside the judgments of both Courts below direct the respondent No.2 to file amended title impleading both the companies as party and thereafter fresh notice shall be issued by the Labour Court on their addresses and after the defence that may be set-up by such companies, the Labour Court will dispose of the matter in accordance with law. As to service of grievance notice obviously that is usually served on the individual authority and mere not mentioning the name of company would not come in the way of respondent No.2. With these directions, this petition stands disposed of. HBT/I-11/Sindh Order accordingly.