2021 PLP 124 (PLC)

ADNAN-UL-KARIM MEMON, J.

Through this constitutional petition, petitioner-company (M/s. Azeem Weaving) has assailed the judgment dated 19.8.2020 passed by the learned Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh at Karachi [SLAT] in Appeal No. KAR-02/2020, whereby its Appeal was disposed of with certain modification in the order dated 14.12.2019 passed by learned Labour Court (SLC), however a reasonable compensation of Rs.400,000/- (Rupees four hundred thousand) was awarded to worker/private respondent, namely Muhammad Arshad as full and final payment for severance of his employment relationship with the petitioner on the analogy of the length of service of the workers and conditions of unemployment prevailing in the country.

2. At the outset, we asked the learned counsel to satisfy this Court on the point of maintainability of the instant petition.

3. Syed Inayat Hussain Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner has addressed the aforesaid issue and argued that the impugned Judgment dated 19.8.2020 passed by the learned SLAT and the impugned judgment 14.12.2019 passed by the learned Sindh Labour Court (SLC) in Grievance Petition No.153 of 2016 filed by the private respondent are full of errors, based on misreading and non-reading of evidence ; that the findings of the learned Courts below are arbitrary and perverse ; that the learned Presiding Officer of SLC, as well as, Member, SLAT have failed to appreciate that the name of respondent was not appearing in the attendance sheet, therefore the impugned judgments passed by both the courts below are not binding upon the petitioner ; that the petitioner was not heard by the learned SLC on the issue involved in the matter ; that the impugned judgment passed by the Member, SLAT, as well as, SLC are illegal, unlawful and against the law, hence, are liable to be set aside; that the learned Courts below erred in holding that the private respondents was terminated from service without inquiry or any show-cause notice ; that the learned SLC erred in reinstating the respondent No.4 with full back benefits ; that the learned Courts below failed to appreciate that there was no relationship between the parties ; that there is no provision in law to award compensation to the workers as such the learned SLAT committed grave error by awarding reasonable compensation of Rs.400,000/- to the private respondent as full and final payment to the private respondent; that the learned SLAT wrongly held that the attendance register, for the period from June 2014 to August 2017, produced by the petitioner as forged document ; that learned SLAT erred in directing the petitioner to deposit the remaining amount of Rs.25,600/- for payment to the private respondent. He lastly prayed for allowing the instant petition.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-company on the point of maintainability and perused the material available on record.

5. It appears from the record that the private respondent filed his grievance applications under section 34 of the Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, against their verbal termination from service, by the petitioner, before the learned SLC Karachi. His grievance application was allowed vide order dated 14.12.2019 whereby the petitioner was directed to reinstate them in service with back benefits with effect from 17.8.2016. The petitioner being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid orders of learned SLC preferred statutory appeal before the learned SLAT Karachi. The learned SLAT after hearing the parties, disposed of their appeal vide judgment dated 19.8.2020 by granting compensation to the Respondent No.1 in lieu of reinstatement. The primary argument of the petitioner's counsel is that there was no relationship of employer and employee. That question of fact has been decided concurrently by both the fora below against the petitioner. Learned counsel has not been able to point any misreading or non-reading of the evidence by the said fora.

6. Adverting to the ground that there is no specific provision for the award of compensation in the Industrial Relations Act/Ordinance, we do not agree with the aforesaid assertion as the grant of compensation in lieu of reinstatement is envisaged under section 45(4)(g) of the Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013 and hence within the power of SLAT who has dealt with this issue in the impugned judgment dated 19.8.2020 and assigned valid reasons to award a reasonable compensation of Rs.400,000/- to the private respondent as full and final payment for severance of their employment relationship with the petitioner-company.

7. In the light of the above facts and circumstances of the case and for the reasons alluded hereinabove, this petition is dismissed in limine along with pending applications with no order as to costs. SA/A-10/Sindh Petition dismisse