1991 PLP 584 (PLC(CS))

Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 16th December, 1990. This is an appeal against the order dated 2nd January, 1990, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, IVth Sindh Labour Court at Karachi, whereby the grievance petition of the respondent filed on 8‑11‑1987 was allowed and he was declared to be permanent employee of the appellants and was ordered to be paid difference/arrears between the emoluments received by him and which he was entitled to receive under the Wage Commission Award.

2. I have heard Ch. Muhammad Latif Saghar, Advocate for the appellants. Respondent called absent though served by publication in Daily Mashriq, dated 20th October, 1990. The appeal is heard ex parte against the respondent. I have also gone through the record and proceedings of the case.

3. Briefly the facts of the case are, that admittedly the respondent was appointed as Driver against permanent vacancy on 1‑11‑1986. His services were subsequently terminated on 24th January, 1988 against which he was filed grievance petition, which was dismissed for non‑prosecution by the learned Labour Court on 22‑1‑1990. Mr. Latif Saghar has produced the certified copy of the order of the Labour Court and further makes statement that neither grievance petition has been restored nor any application for restoration has been submitted by the respondent. However, by the order dated 2‑1‑1990 the learned Labour Court passed the order which is impugned in this appeal.

4. The appellants did not produce any evidence in rebuttal before the learned Labour Court, as their side was closed. The appellants filed application for re‑opening their side which was also dismissed by the learned Labour Court. The respondent's statement that he was a permanent employee from 1‑11‑1986 thus stands unrebutted. Admittedly the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 is applicable to the appellants' establishment and as such the respondent would be deemed to have acquired the status of permanent workman as defined under Standing Order 1(b) of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968.

5. Mr. Latif Saghar contends that respondent's services had been terminated on 24‑1‑1988, therefore, the learned Labour Court could not have declared him to be a permanent employee after termination of his service. There is no such bar under the law. Besides when the impugned order was passed the grievance petition of respondent against the termination of his service was still pending before the learned Labour Court.

6. Even otherwise he could not be deprived of any rights that he may have acquired during the period of his service. It is also not disputed that the permanent workmen of the appellants are entitled to get the wages and other emoluments under the Wage Commission Award. As such, I find no merit in this appeal and dismiss it with this modification that arrears/difference of the emoluments, if and, payable to the respondent under the impugned order would payable upto 24‑1‑1988, when his services were terminated. M.Y.H./1813/Lb. S Appeal dismissed