1993 PLP 434 (PLC)

2. The petitioners, some of whom are bakers, cooks, bearers and the like, had been attached to the hostel and the mess of the Cadet College established by the Respondent No.I some time in 1982, allege to have been denied the benefits and rights of permanent workmen and were being doled out only Daily Wages. They had repeatedly asked the authorities to redress their grievances but as all their entreaties and requests had gone unheeded, they had served the respondents with Grievance Notices and later filed the petitions before the Labour Court.

3. In the Written Reply filed by the respondents, it was stated that the Cadet College .was an independent establishment separate from Respondent No.I and being an educational institution, the provisions of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 or the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 were‑ not applicable. The petitions were therefore liable to be dismissed. Issues were not joined in regard to the other allegations.

4. All these petitions were consolidated by the Labour Court on 12‑2‑1991 as prayed by the parties. It was mutually agreed that one of the petitioners namely Mohammad Riaz only will be examined while Ashfaqur Rehman, Respondent No.5 was to be examined on behalf of the respondents and their evidence be treated as evidence in all the petitions.

5. The Labour Court founds that the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 was applicable and as a result allowed all the petitions.

6. The salient feature of the case are not disputed and the only question for consideration would be whether the respondents, who have all along been retained by an "educational institution" i.e. the Cadet College were workmen" within the meaning of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968?

7. Mr. Abdus Samad and Mr. Nadeem Azhar appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the Institution had been funded and brought into existence by the Respondent No.l as a purely educational institution, where some technical training also, as admitted by the respondents themselves, was being imparted. It was pointed out that the Steel Mills Area is at a far‑flung distance from Karachi, and being the biggest industrial enterprise in the country has thousands of workmen and staff to run it. Their families are living within that area and the education of the children was posing a great problem. It was not easy for the school going children to be transported to different institutions day in and day out, and it was to cope up with this problem essentially, that the idea of starting a College within their own campus took a form and shape. It was further argued that from the year 1985 the Cadet College is totally independent and the money from the realisation of the fees is being credited in their own separate account and is being utilised for the purposes of providing books and other facilities to the residents of the hostel and the improvement of the College itself. It is true that the land, belonged to the Respondent No.I and it was built up by them but not with an eye on profits, if any, but to cater to the needs of their employee's children in the main.

8. It was further argued that on the showing of the respondents themselves, they were, right from the inception of their employment, attached to the hostel, which is an adjunct of the college and there was abundant law available to show that educational institutions do not fall within the purview of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968. Reference was made to the cases of K.G. Old, Principal, Christian Training Centre, Gujranwala v. Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court and others 1976 PLC

675. Employees Union of Jamia Karachi v. Registrar of Trade Unions, Sindh and others PLC 1981 page 403, Ghulam Sarwar and others v. Principal, Government Training College, Khairpur 1982 PLC 771 and A.F. Furguson and Co v. Sindh Labour Court and others PLD 1985 Supreme Court 429. 8‑A. In K.G. Old's case the dispute was whether the two workshops, where training was imparted to the students and work was done for private parties in woodwork, sheet metal welding etc., on which charges levied as in Industrial and Commercial establishments would also be treated as an educational institution. After considering a number of cases, some of which were from foreign jurisdiction also, it was held that the functions will not come within the mischief of the definition of "Industry" to bring the case within the purview of the Labour Laws.

9. The point involved in the case of Employees Union Jamia Karachi, revolved around the question whether the: University or the Secondary Education Board could be treated as Industry? The contentions were examined in depth, and it was found that the absence of material nature of service kept the University and the Secondary Board out of the pale of the word Industry.

10. The petitioner in Ghulam Sarwar's case referred to above, was attached to the Government Teachers Training College, Khairpur and it was found that Government Teachers Training College could not be deemed to be an Industrial or Commercial establishment for the purposes of the Standing Orders Ordinance.

11. In the Supreme Court judgment in Furguson's case, which was disposed of on other grounds, their Lordships took care to spell out that they should not be taken to be in agreement with the views taken by the Sindh Nigh Court, wherein as a result of amendment in the definition of "Industry" the firm Furguson was found to be an Industry.

12. In view of these pronouncements on the subject, I have no hesitation in holding that the Cadet College, though established by the Pakistan Steel, enjoyed the character of an Educational Institution and will be immune from the applicability of the Standing Orders Ordinance.

13. I will, therefore, set aside the order passed by the Labour Court and allow the appeals. However I must hasten to add that the short change being dealt to the respondents does not behave an institution, which was nurtured by and enjoyed the fostering care of the premier industrial enterprise of the land. H.B.T./2116/Lb.S Appeals allowed.