PLC 1986

1986 PLP 413 (PLC)

DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAY, KARACHI Versus PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT N0. VI, HYDERABAD and 2 others

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi High Court
Decided Date
Constitutional Petition No.S‑7 of 1980, decided on 12th October, 1985.
Honorable Judges
Haider Ali Pirzada, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1986 PLP 413 (PLC)
Forum / Court Karachi High Court
Bench Members Haider Ali Pirzada, J
Parties DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAY, KARACHI Versus PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT N0. VI, HYDERABAD and 2 others
Primary Law Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 413 (PLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 413 (PLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Haider Ali Pirzada, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 413 (PLC) (DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAY, KARACHI Versus PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT N0. VI, HYDERABAD and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)‑‑

Representation

  • Abdul Matin Khan for Petitioner.
  • Nemo for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 9th October, 1985.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑Ss. 2(vi) & 15‑‑Pakistan Railway Establishment Code, 1952, rr.202 & 203‑‑Daily allowance‑‑Nature of‑‑Claim for‑‑Daily allowance being kind of travelling allowance has been excluded from definition of wages and was not admissible under Rules framed by Railways‑‑Authority under Act IV of 1936, held, acted illegally and without lawful authority in holding that daily allowance was admissible under rules framed by Railways. Yousuf Ali v. Muhammad Aslam Zia P L D 1958 S C 104 and Mst. Abida and another v. Haji Muhammad Boots and 3 others P L D 1976 SC 41 rel.

Judgment & Decree

(vi) "Wages" means all remuneration, capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of the contract of employment, expressed or implied, were fulfilled, be payable, whether conditionally upon the regular attendance, good work or conduct or other behaviour of the person employed or otherwise to a person employed in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment, and includes any bonus or other additional remuneration of the nature aforesaid which would be as payable and any sum payable to such person by reason of the termination of his employment, but does not include:‑ (a) the value of any house accommodation, supply of light water, medical attendance or any amenity or of any service excluded by general or special order of the (Provincial Government). (b) any contribution paid by the employer to any pension fund or Provident fund; (c) any travelling allowance or the value of travelling concession; (d) any sum paid to the person employed to defray special expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment; or (e) any gratuity payable on discharge." Rule 202 of Pakistan Railways Code, Volume 1 describes the different kinds of travelling allowance. Rule 202 is reproduced below:‑ "Different kinds of Travelling Allowance.‑‑The following are the different kinds of travelling allowance: (1) Daily allowance. (2) Mileage allowance. (3) Permanent or consolidated travelling allowance. (4) Conveyance allowance. (5) Actual cost of travelling." Rule 208 of Pakistan Railways Code, Volume 1 reads as under:‑ "The point in any station at which a journey is held to commence or end is the railway station provided that a journey on transfer shall be held to begin and end at the actual residence of the railway servant concerned." The nearing reading of section 2(vi) of the Payment t1f Wages Act, 1936 shows that the daily allowance which is a kind of travelling allowance having been excluded from the definition of wages. Rule 202 of the Pakistan Railway Establishment Code, Volume I provides that daily allowance is one of the kinds of travelling allowance. Rule 203 thereof provides that daily allowance may be drawn by a railway servant who is not in receipt of a permanent travelling allowance, on any day on which he proceeds on tour beyond a radius of five miles from his headquarters or returns to his headquarters from a similar distance. I am of the opinion that the respondent No.2 has acted illegally and without lawful authority in observing and holding that daily allowance is admissible under the rules framed by the Railway. I am of the vies, that the definition of wages as contained in section 2(vi) of the Ace read with Rule 202 of the Code clearly excludes the jurisdiction of respondent No.2 in entertaining the application under section 15 of the Act. In that view of the matter since the basic order of respondent. No.2 is nullity and without jurisdiction and is against the law. Th order, dated 15‑4‑1979 is void. The appeal based thereon is also void. See Yousuf Ali v. Muhammad Aslam Zia P L D 1958 S C 104 and Mst. Abida and another v. Haji Muhammad Boota and 3 others P L D 1976 SC

41. In view of this it is not necessary to deal with the second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The upshot of the discussion is that the orders and proceedings in this case are declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal consequences against the petitioner and the application filed by the Respondent is dismissed with no order as to costs. H. B. T.??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition allowed.