1998 PLP 24 (PLC)
NAZIR AHMED and another Versus Messrs KORANGI FEEDS, KARACHI and another
| Citation | 1998 PLP 24 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | NAZIR AHMED and another Versus Messrs KORANGI FEEDS, KARACHI and another |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 24 (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 1998 PLP 24 (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: 1998 PLP 24 (PLC) (NAZIR AHMED and another Versus Messrs KORANGI FEEDS, KARACHI and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Date of hearing: 23rd December, 1996.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 25-A
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 1(4)(a)
Grievance petition-- Maintainability
Employees had asserted that their grievance petition against termination of their services was maintainable as employer employed twenty workers
Burden of proof initially was on employees to show that employer had employed twenty or more workers but they failed to prove from oral or documentary evidence that more than twenty workers were employed-- Employer produced register to show that at no time more than eleven workers were employed by employer
Grievance petition filed by employees, thus, was not maintainable as West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 was not applicable to the case bf employees. Appellants in person.
Judgment & Decree
S. 25-A
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 1(4)(a)
Grievance petition-- Maintainability
Employees had asserted that their grievance petition against termination of their services was maintainable as employer employed twenty workers
Burden of proof initially was on employees to show that employer had employed twenty or more workers but they failed to prove from oral or documentary evidence that more than twenty workers were employed-- Employer produced register to show that at no time more than eleven workers were employed by employer
Grievance petition filed by employees, thus, was not maintainable as West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 was not applicable to the case bf employees. Appellants in person. Date of hearing: 23rd December, 1996. Islamuddin and Nazir Ahmed appellants present in person. These are two connected appeals arising from the decision of 1st Sindh Labour Court, Karachi, whereby the grievance petitions of the appellant workers for reinstatement and back benefits were dismissed.
2. The facts in brief are that the appellants were employed in the respondent factory known as M/s. Korangi Feeds. On 4-5-1993 they were gate-stopped and no termination letter was issued to them. The learned Labour Court found that according to the documentary evidence at no time were there more than eleven workers working in this factory. That the burden was on the petitioners to show that 20 or more workers were employed in the factory before they can claim the benefits of the Standing Orders Ordinance. The petitions under section 25-A of the I.R.O. were, therefore, held not to be maintainable and they were dismissed. The burden of proof is initially on the workers to show that the factory employed 20 or more persons. They have not been able to prove from oral or documentary evidence that more than 20 persons were employed. On the other hand the respondents produced their Register to show that at no time more than eleven persons were employed. The Standing Orders Ordinance has, therefore, no application to the case of appellants.
3. The decision of the Labour Court is accordingly maintained and the appeals are dismissed. H. B. T./210/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.