1996 PLP 127 (PLC)

Appeal No. KAR‑464 of 1995, decided on 26th November, 1995. ‑‑‑‑Ss. 1(3)(0 & 25‑A‑‑‑West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 1(4)(a)‑‑‑Grievance petition‑‑ Maintainability‑‑‑Grievance petition filed by employee who was working as a Radiographer Technician in the X‑Ray Section of Pathological Laboratory where eight to ten persons were working, was dismissed being not maintainable‑‑‑X‑Ray Section of Pathological Laboratory where employee was working was a unit for benefit of sick and infirm persons, which was excluded from application of provisions of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 under S. 1(3)(f) thereof‑‑‑X‑Ray Section of Pathological Laboratory where less than twenty persons were employed, was excluded from operation of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 and West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968‑‑‑Grievance petition filed by employee was rightly dismissed by Court below being not maintainable. Haq Nawaz Baloch for Appellant. Date of hearing: 26th November, 1995. The appellant was working as a Radiographer (Technician) in the X‑Ray Section of the Pathological Laboratory of Dr. Manji, Darakshan Malir. The grievance petition of the appellant has been dismissed as being not maintainable by the Fourth Sindh Labour Court, Karachi, because this laboratory is also an establishment maintained for the treatment or care of sick or infirm persons within the meaning of section 1(3)(0 of the I.R.O. and is excluded from definition of workers. The other ground for non‑maintainability of the grievance petition shown by the Labour Court is that this a the unit of the Laboratory employing 8 or 10 persons and not 20 or more persons as required under the Standing Orders Ordinance for formation of commercial establishment. The learned Labour Court accordingly dismissed the grievance petition of the appellant.

2. A Pathological Laboratory in X‑Ray Unit is for the benefit of sick and infirm persons. It is, therefore, excluded under the above exception. The burden of proving that there are 20 or more persons working is also on the appellant worker in the first instance and this burden is not discharged. Mere admission that 4 or 5 other persons named were also working at one time with the Pathological Laboratory does not show that they were 20 or more and they were working within one year of the grievance petition. The respondent Pathological Unit and X‑Ray Laboratory is, therefore, excluded from operation of the I.R.O. and Industrial or Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance.

3. There is no substance in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed in limine.' H.B.T:/2552/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.