1995SCMR21 (PLP)
FAISALABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AMIN and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1995SCMR21 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan, Actg: CJ. and Manzoor Hussain Sial, J |
| Parties | FAISALABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AMIN and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995SCMR21 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995SCMR21 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan, Actg: CJ. and Manzoor Hussain Sial, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995SCMR21 (PLP) (FAISALABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AMIN and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Asadullah Siddiqui, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 8th May, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment/order of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 7‑11‑1993 in Writ Petitions Nos. 460, 461, 463, 464, 465, 467 and 469 of 1992). ‑‑‑‑S. 25‑A‑‑‑West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.O.1‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Direction by Labour Court to Authority for regularisation of employees' services‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider the contentions that the employment of employees was not of permanent nature even though it had been continuing for more than nine months; that Authority was engaged in carrying out many projects and on completion of any of its work work‑charged establishment was to be shifted to another project; and that employees couil not be regarded as in permanent employment within the meaning of S.O. 1 of Ordinance VI of 1968. Muhammad Yaqoob v. Punjab Labour Court No. 1 1990 SCMR 1539 rel.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, Actg. CJ; ‑‑These petitions for special leave to appeal are directed against the same judgment of the Lahore High Court whereby it dismissed the Constitution petitions preferred by the petitioners against the order of the Labour Court.
2. The respondents have been in the employment of the petitioners for the last five years without any break. They form part of its work‑charged establishment. They moved applications before the Labour Court at Faisalabad for a declaration that they were in the permanent employment. of the petitioners within the meaning of Standing Order No.1 of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance. Their applications were allowed and the petitioners were directed to regularise them in service. The petitioners filed appeals before the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal but without any success. They then invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court but their petitions were dismissed.
3. In support of these petitions it is contended that the employment of the respondents was not of permanent nature even though it had been continuing for more than nine month. The Faisalabad Development Authority was engaged in carrying out many projects. When one of its project is completed the work‑charged establishment is to be shifted to another project. The respondents cannot be regarded as in permanent employment within the meaning of Standing Order No.1, ibid. In support of this contention reference has been made to a judgment of this Court in Muhammad Yaqoob v. Punjab Labour Court No.1 (1990 SCMR 1539).
4. The contentions raised in support of these petitions need examination. Leave to appeal is granted. A.A./D‑107/S Leave granted.