2006 PLP 183 (PLC)
TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION UNIT DINA TEHSIL COUNCIL through Nazim Versus AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1936, JHELUM
| Citation | 2006 PLP 183 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Ali Nawaz Chowhan, J |
| Parties | TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION UNIT DINA TEHSIL COUNCIL through Nazim Versus AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1936, JHELUM |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 183 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 183 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Ali Nawaz Chowhan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 183 (PLC) (TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION UNIT DINA TEHSIL COUNCIL through Nazim Versus AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1936, JHELUM). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mehmood Arshad Chaudhry for Petitioner.
- Ch. Sadiq Muhammad Warraich and Kh. Muhammad Arif for Respondent.
Judgment & Decree
ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, J
Tehsil Municipal Administration, Unit Dina, District Jhelum is the petitioner in this case and the relevant law to be dealt with is the Punjab Employees Special Allowance (Payment) Ordinance, 1988.
2. The petitioner impugns the order dated 8-8-2002 given by the Authority under Payment of Wages Act and Commissioner Workmen's Compensation, Jhelum. The operative part of the order reads as follows:-- "I have given. my full consideration to the arguments of both A sides and I am therefore inclined to the arguments of the Rep. of petitioners accepting the binding of the section 15(3) and rule (2) of Payment of Wages Act 1936 and Payment of Wages (Procedure) Rules, 1937 respectively. On these grounds the application of the respondent dated 29-4-2002 is rejected accordingly and order passed earlier dated 30-1-2002 shall remain in effect."
3. It was argued before this Court that since the petitioner was not a factory, the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 was not applicable. This was the ground taken at the time of the admission of this writ petition on 10-9-2002.
4. Meeting this argument, the learned counsel has stated that of course the petitioner was not a factory but the liability of the petitioner under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, is established by the Punjab Employees Special Allowance (Payment) Ordinance, 1988. Which extends the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act 1936 to such undertakings which are involved in construction industry and the definition of construction industry is derived from Section 2 Clause 'bb' of the West Pakistan (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968.
5. Section 2(bb) of the West Pakistan (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, reads as follows:-- (a) .. (b) .. (bb) 'construction industry' means an industry engaged in the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, alteration or demolition of any building railways, tramway, harbour, dock, pier, canal, inland waterway, road, tunnel, bridge, dam, phonic installation, electrical undertaking, gas work, or other work of construction as well as the preparation for or laying the foundation of any such work or structure; (c) .. (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)
6. Section 2(e) of the Punjab Employees' Special Allowance (Payment) Act, 1988, defines "undertaking" as follows:-- "Undertaking means:-- (i) .. (ii) a construction industry to which the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, for the time being applies; (iii) .. (iv) .. (v) .. (vi) .. includes any class of establishments which Government may by notification in the official Gazette, declare to be undertakings for the purposes of this Ordinance."
7. Because the Tehsil Municipal Administration is a construction' industry as defined by the West Pakistan (Standing Orders) Ordinance, c 1968, it comes within the ambit of Employees' Special Allowance (Payment) Act, 1988.
8. Section 6 of this law of 1988 reads as follows:
"Claim for recovery or delay in payment of Special Allowance:--Where contrary to the provisions of this Act, the Special Allowance of any employee has been withheld or delayed such worker himself or through any other person authorized by him in this behalf may apply. (a) in the case of an establishment to which the West Pakistan Shops and Establishment Ordinance, 1969 for the time being applies, to the authority apported under sub-section (1) of Section 12 thereof having jurisdiction and the provisions of the section and sections 11, 13, 21, 23, 30 and 32 of that Ordinance shall, so far as may be and with necessary modifications apply for the purposes of recovery of the Special Allowance and (b) in any other case to the authority appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the. Payment of Wages Act, 1936 having jurisdiction and the provisions of the said Section and Sections 6, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 26 of the said Act shall so far as may be and with necessary modifications, apply for the purposes of recovery of the Special Allowance."
9. Therefore, the view as has been re-produced above in the order of 8-8-2002, was not based on any mistake and where this law is applicable, therefore, those provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and the rules made thereunder would also be applicable by virtue of Section 7(b) of the Punjab Employees' Special Allowance (Payment) Ordinance 1988.
10. Consequently, the present Writ Petition fails after the findings afore-mentioned and it is disposed of with no order as to costs. H.B.T./T-120/L Petition dismissed.