1987 PLP 13 (PLC)
WORKERS, UNION Versus Messrs PAKISTAN HERALD PUBLICATIONS
| Citation | 1987 PLP 13 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind |
| Bench Members | Ali Nawaz Budhani, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | WORKERS, UNION Versus Messrs PAKISTAN HERALD PUBLICATIONS |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 13 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 13 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind bench comprising: Ali Nawaz Budhani, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 13 (PLC) (WORKERS, UNION Versus Messrs PAKISTAN HERALD PUBLICATIONS). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Humayun for Respondent.
Judgment & Decree
1984 P L C 1359 ref. Faiz Ghangro for Appellant. Muhammad Humayun for Respondent. Date of hearing: 2nd February, 1986. The General Secretary on behalf of certain workers, not named in the said application, filed a case under section 25‑A, I.R.0., 1969. The subject‑matter in this application mainly is that certain allowances etc. have not been included in the bonus paid to the workers.
2. The stand taken by the respondents, namely, Pakistan Herald Publications that the very application is not maintainable as it did not name the aggrieved persons.
3. The reliance is placed on 1984 P L C 1359. In this Full Bench authority, it was contemplated that workers themselves may file their grievance applications under section 25‑A or 25‑A(10) of I.R.O., 1969, before the Labour Court, but section 34 would not apply in case of individual workers. Section 34 (as amended by Industrial Relations) (Amendment) Act, 1973, and Section 25‑.A object of omitting word 'workman' from provisions of section 34 seems to be that in section 25‑A, I.R.O., 1969, right has been given to workman to seek redress A of his grievance in respect of any right guaranteed or secured to him by or under any law or by any award or settlement in manner provided therein. Section 34 of I.R.O. 1969 is as under: ‑ "Application to Labour Court.‑‑ Any collective bargaining agent or any employer may apply to the Labour Court for the enforcement of any right guaranteed or secured to it or him by or under any law or any award or settlement."
4. In nutshell it contemplates that only Collective Bargaining Agent or employer can apply to the Labour Court for enforcement of any right guaranteed or secured to him or to it by or under any law or any award or settlement and not to the workman. So, section 34 does not apply where workman is agitating his own case or the case of other workman. He can only agitate under section 25‑A or under section 25‑A(10) of I.R.O. 1969. In the instant case, the aggrieved workman is not named. Therefore, the application under section 25‑A, I.R.O. 1969, is ‑not maintainable. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. A. E. Appeal dismissed.