1989 PLP 602 (PLC)

(b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 25‑A‑‑West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 1(4), 12(3)‑‑Grievance petition‑‑Dismissal for misconduct‑‑Employee of Dispensary run by Punjab' Employees Social Security Institution‑‑Applicability of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 not disputed‑‑Remedy sought against wrongful dismissal allegedly contrary to S.O. 12(3)‑‑Grievance petition under S. 25‑A, held, was maintainable notwithstanding non‑application of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. 1982 P L C 137 and 1979 P L C 289 ref. Munawar Ahmad Javed for Petitioner. Iftikhar Ahmad Dar for Respondent. Date of hearing: 10th October, 1983. The revision titled above arises from the order dated 3‑5‑1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4, Faisalabad, whereby the grievance petition of the petitioner for his reinstatement in service was dismissed on the sole ground that, according to clause (f) of section 1(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 was not applicable. The petitioner was a dispenser in Social Security Dispensary. On account of allegations of misconduct he was removed from service.

2. No doubt, clause (f) of section 1(3) excludes the applicability of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 to persons employed by an establishment maintained for the treatment or care of sick, infirm, destitute or mentally unfit persons, but there is no evidence that the dispensary is an independent establishment. It is being run by the Social Security Institution which charges the other establishments whose employees are given treatment. Dispensary is a part and parcel of Social Security Institution. It cannot be treated as a separate and independent establishment. Since the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 applies to the Social Security Institution, it applies to all its constituents. A big hospital may be a separate entity having its own budget but a dispensary is always subject to and under the control of an establishment. Apart from it by virtue of Standing Order 12(3) of the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968, an application for reinstatement by a dismissed or terminated person, under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 lies if Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 applies to it. Standing Order 12(3) says that dismissed or terminated persons can bring their grievances to Labour Courts under section 25=A of the Industrial B Relations Ordinance, 1969. This is not the case of the respondent that Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 is not applicable to the petitioner. Reliance may be placed in this respect upon 1982 P L C 137 and 1979 P L C

289. The learned lower Court has, therefore, wrongly held that the petition under section 25‑A is not maintainable.

3. As upshot of the observations made above, I accept the revision, which should have been an appeal, and setting aside the impugned decision of the learned lower Court, remand the case for decision on merits. A.E./655/Lb. P Revision accepted