1996 PLP 738 (PLC(CS))
Syed QUDRAT SHAH and 5 others Versus H. NIZAM DIN & SONS, KARACHI
| Citation | 1996 PLP 738 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | Syed QUDRAT SHAH and 5 others Versus H. NIZAM DIN & SONS, KARACHI |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 738 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 PLP 738 (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 738 (PLC(CS)) (Syed QUDRAT SHAH and 5 others Versus H. NIZAM DIN & SONS, KARACHI). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Shafiq Qureshi for Appellants.
- Date of hearing: 8th April, 1996.
Headnotes / Summary
S.O. 12
Services of employees were terminated by orders in writing on ground that number of orders for product of company had considerably decreased
Employees had failed to prove that they were victimised on account of union activities
Employers were justified under law for reasons of re-organisation to reduce their own workers' strength for effecting economy when orders for product of company had gone down
Management cannot be compelled under law to keep the workers under such circumstances-- Services of employees, thus, were rightly terminated.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S.O. 12‑‑‑Termination of service‑‑‑Services of employees were terminated by orders in writing on ground that number of orders for product of company had considerably decreased‑‑‑Employees had failed to prove that they were victimised on account of union activities‑‑‑Employers were justified under law for reasons of re‑organisation to reduce their own workers' strength for effecting economy when orders for product of company had gone down‑‑‑Management cannot be compelled under law to keep the workers under such circumstances‑‑ Services of employees, thus, were rightly terminated. Muhammad Shafiq Qureshi for Appellants. Date of hearing: 8th April, 1996. These are six connected appeals filed by Mr. Shafiq Qureshi on behalf of the workers of M/s. Nizam Din & Sons. Tents Makers at S.I.T.E., Karachi. It is alleged that there were about 400 workers employed in this establishment but the six workers' services were terminated under Order 12 of the Standing Orders Ordinance for the reason that the number of orders for the tents had considerably decreased. The termination, orders were in writing giving reasons
2. The case of the appellant was that about 50 % of the workers were discharged without permission of the Labour Court. The learned Labour Court found that the grievance petition of these workers was clearly time‑barred, and no condonation application for delay had been made, but the reasons justifying the delay could not be accepted. The main grievance of the petitioners was that they were victimised on account of union activities. It is hard to believe that an industrial concern has terminated the services of bulk of its workers just on account of union activities. There is no reliable evidence to prove this point. The respondents were justified under the law for reasons of re‑organisation to reduce their own workers for effecting economy when the orders had gone down. It is not the intention of the labour laws to compel the management to keep the workmen under such circumstances.
3. Under the circumstances I can see no reason to interfere with the order of the Labour Court and these six appeals are dismissed in limine. H.B.T./108/Lb.S Appeals dismissed.