1999 PLP 50 (PLC)
MUHAMMAD ASHIQ Versus MANAGING DIRECTOR, BATALA KISSAN INDUSTRY, SAHIWAL
| Citation | 1999 PLP 50 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Mian Ghulam Ahmad, Chairman |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHIQ Versus MANAGING DIRECTOR, BATALA KISSAN INDUSTRY, SAHIWAL |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 50 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 50 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Mian Ghulam Ahmad, Chairman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 50 (PLC) (MUHAMMAD ASHIQ Versus MANAGING DIRECTOR, BATALA KISSAN INDUSTRY, SAHIWAL). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ali Ahsan Syed for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 11th December, 1997.
Headnotes / Summary
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 25‑A & 37(3)‑‑‑Grievance petition‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Appellant who was once employee of respondent industry and his services were dispensed with, had laid claim to an amount as arrears of his dues by approaching Labour Court under S.25‑A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969‑‑ Worker's service rights guaranteed and secured under any law or award or a settlement could be enforced through the Labour Court but right sought to be secured by appellant, did not fall under said category as he was no longer in service of respondent concern or industry which he claimed to have served for a number of years‑‑‑Appellant, in circumstances, was disentitled to enforce his claim to emoluments or the dues in dispute through Labour Court‑‑‑Labour Court had rightly dismissed grievance petition of appellant directing him to present same before proper forum. 1994 SCMR 2213 and 1998 PLC 1 ref. Appellant in person.
Judgment & Decree
1994 SCMR 2213 and 1998 PLC 1 ref. Appellant in person. Ali Ahsan Syed for Respondent. Date of hearing: 11th December, 1997. JUDGEMENT By an order dated 22‑5‑1996, learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court at Multan returned the grievance petition of Muhammad Ashiq, filed under section 25‑A, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, for its presentation before the proper forum; and he has come up in appeal to this Court, filed under section 37(3) ibid.
2. Muhammad Ashiq was an employee of Batal Kisan Industry/Dairy, Chowk Arifwala, Lahore‑Multan Road, Sahiwal. His services were dispensed with on 27‑6‑1995, when his monthly salary was Rs.1,
100. He laid claim to an amount of Rs.1,01,300 as arrears of his dues, by approaching the Labour Court, Multan (camped at Sahiwal), under section 25‑A ibid. The respondent concerned raised initial objection against the competence of the petition, by contending that person actually in service of a concern, although having been working there as a workman, could only have recourse to a Labour Court: A person dismissed, discharged, retrenched, laid off or otherwise removed from an employment, not in consequence of an industrial dispute also cannot have access to the aforesaid forum, as was held in 1994 SCMR 2213 and 1998 PLC
1. Worker's service rights, guaranteed and secured under any law, or award or a settlement could also be enforced through the Labour Court. The right sought to be secured by the appellant, in this case, however does not fall under the aforesaid category; and undeniably he is no longer in service of the concern or the industry which he claims to have served for a number of years. He was, as such, disentitled to enforce his claim to the emoluments or the dues in dispute, through the Labour Court.
3. The finding recorded in that behalf by the learned Labour Court, Multan cannot be differed with and is hereby affirmed. There was no need to call upon the parties to lead evidence for or against the claim in question, the objection raised preliminarily being purely legal. The appeal has evidently no merit and is hereby dismissed, although I leave the parties to bear the irrespective costs of the litigation. H.B.T./919/Lb.P Appeal dismissed