2005 PLP 74 (PLC)
MUHAMMAD ALI. MALIK Versus WORKMAN COMMISSIONER/WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION AND AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1936 arid 2 others
| Citation | 2005 PLP 74 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ALI. MALIK Versus WORKMAN COMMISSIONER/WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION AND AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1936 arid 2 others |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 74 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 74 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 74 (PLC) (MUHAMMAD ALI. MALIK Versus WORKMAN COMMISSIONER/WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION AND AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1936 arid 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Malik Abdul Sattar Dogar for Petitioners.
- Muhammad Hanif Khatana, Addl. Advocate‑General entered appearance on Court's call assisted by Syed Faisal Raza for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.17‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199 ‑‑‑ Constitutional petition‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Legislation by reference‑‑‑Alternative remedy‑‑‑Workman Commissioner/Workman's Compensation Authority had accepted the applications of workmen‑‑‑Petitioners filed applications under section 12(2), C.P.C.‑‑‑Which were rejected being barred by time‑‑‑Such order was challenged in Constitutional petitions ‑‑‑Validity‑‑ Constitutional petitions were incompetent as remedy of appeal before the Labour Court by virtue of section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 was available even after the repeal of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Ch. Muhammad Ismail's case PLD 1996 SC 246 cited. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Preamble‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Repeal of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969‑‑‑Legislation by reference‑‑‑Incorporation of legislation by reference as per law laid down by Superior Court‑‑‑Remedy to file appeal was available. to the petitioners‑‑‑Petitioners were well within their rights to avail the proper remedy before the Appellate Authority on the well known principle of legislation by reference or by incorporation even after repeal of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Pakistan International Air Lines Corporation's case PLD 1979 Lah. 415 cited.
Judgment & Decree
(iii) W.P. No. 15001 of 2004. (iv) W. P. No. 15002 of 2004. (v) W. P. No. 15003 of 2004. (vi) W.P. No. 15004 of 2004. (vii) W.P. No. 15005 of 2004. (viii) W.P. No. 15006 of 2004. (ix) W. P. No. 15007 of 2004. (x) W. P. No..15008 of 2004. (xi) W. P. No. 15009 of 2004. (xii) W.P. No. 15010 of 2004. (xiii) W.P. No. 15011 of 2004. (xiv) W.P. No. 15012 of 2004.
2. The brief. facts out of which the aforesaid writ petitions arise are that the private respondents submitted the applications before the Workman Commissioner/Workmen's Compensation Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, which were accepted by the respondent, Workman Commissioner/Workmen's Compensation Authority vide order dated 30‑6‑2003. The petitioners being aggrieved filed applications under section 12(2), C.P.C. which were dismissed as time‑barred by respondent No.1. The petitioners being aggrieved filed the, aforesaid Constitutional petitions.
3. The learned counsel of the petitioners submits that respondent No.1 erred in law to dismiss the applications of the petitioners as time barred. The time is prescribed as three years by virtue of Article 181 of the Limitation Act.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel of the parties and perused the record.
5. It is admitted fact that private respondents have filed applications before respondent No.1 under the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, which were accepted by respondent No.
1. The petitioners have alternative remedy to file appeals before the Labour Court by virtue of section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 even after the repeal of I.R.O., 1969 on the well known principle of legislation by reference or by incorporation as per law laid down by this A Court in Pakistan International Air Lines Corporation's case (PLD 1979 Lah. 415), therefore, Constitutional petitions are not maintainable in view of the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Ch. Muhammad Ismail's case (PLD 1996 SC.246). The petitioners are well within their rights to avail the proper remedy before the appellate authority in terms of the aforesaid provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 before the competent forum. With these observations the writ petitions are disposed of. Copy Dasti on payment of usual charges. M.I./M‑704/L Order accordingly.