1970 PLP 322 (PLC)
MILLS LABOUR UNION (RECD.), HYDERABAD Versus MESSRS AMIN FABRICS LTD., KOTRI
| Citation | 1970 PLP 322 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Industrial Appellate Tribunal West Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Inamullah Khan, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MILLS LABOUR UNION (RECD.), HYDERABAD Versus MESSRS AMIN FABRICS LTD., KOTRI |
| Primary Law | Industrial dispute |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 PLP 322 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial dispute as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 PLP 322 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Industrial Appellate Tribunal West Pakistan bench comprising: Inamullah Khan, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1970 PLP 322 (PLC) (MILLS LABOUR UNION (RECD.), HYDERABAD Versus MESSRS AMIN FABRICS LTD., KOTRI). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Izat Puri for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 28th March 1970.
Headnotes / Summary
‑Casual leave‑Settlement clause reciting that "any absence whether on authorised leave . . . . . . . . will disqualify workmen from payment of attendance allowance " Contention that absence on casual leave would not be covered by terms "absence on authorised leave"‑Held, casual leave cannot be availed of without being authorised and as such casual leave cannot furnish any exception to such clause of settlement. Wasiullah Qureshi for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
‑Casual leave‑Settlement clause reciting that "any absence whether on authorised leave . . . . . . . . will disqualify workmen from payment of attendance allowance " Contention that absence on casual leave would not be covered by terms "absence on authorised leave"‑Held, casual leave cannot be availed of without being authorised and as such casual leave cannot furnish any exception to such clause of settlement. Wasiullah Qureshi for Applicant. Izat Puri for Respondent. Date of hearing: 28th March 1970. This is an application under section 50 of the Industrial Relation Ordinance, 1969, for interpretation of clause 3(1) of the agreement dated June 3, 1967. The relevant provision of the agreement which requires interpretation, runs as under:‑ The parties have agreed to the introduction of an Attendance Allowance Scheme with effect from June 3, 1967, subject to the Lab following terms and conditions:‑ (i) that the attendance allowance will be payable to those Am workmen in permanent service of the mills who will be regular and punctual in attendance and work throughout the Ltd fortnight. Any absence whether on authorised leave or other‑ Ana wise from work on any day in the fortnight or any late attendance will disqualify the workmen concerned from the payment of the attendance allowance for the fortnight.
2. The contention of Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi, learned Repre sentative for the workmen, is that the workmen would be entitled to attendance allowance even if they were to proceed on casual lease. I do not think that this interpretation is possible on the language of the agreement reproduced, above. The‑ parties did not make any exception even in case of authorised leave. Casual leave cannot be availed of without being authorised. I would hold that casual leave cannot furnish any exception to the clause of the agreement so as to entitle a workman to claim A attendance allowance.