1989 PLP 482 (PLC)
CYNAMIDE (PAK) EMPLOYEES' UNION Versus SIND LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
| Citation | 1989 PLP 482 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Ahmad Ali U. Qureshi, JJ |
| Parties | CYNAMIDE (PAK) EMPLOYEES' UNION Versus SIND LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL |
| Primary Law | Employees' Cost of Living (Relief) Act, 1973 (1 of 1974)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 482 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Employees' Cost of Living (Relief) Act, 1973 (1 of 1974)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 482 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Ahmad Ali U. Qureshi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 482 (PLC) (CYNAMIDE (PAK) EMPLOYEES' UNION Versus SIND LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ali Amjad for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 1st September, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 3(6) [as added by Employees' Cost of Living (Relief) (Amendment) Act (XIV of 1985))‑‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 50‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑Cost of living allowance‑‑Increase in‑ Employer's entitlement to set‑off‑‑Employer was entitled to set‑off any amount paid by him on account of increase in the cost of living, while making payment of statutory increase of cost of living allowance, under the Cost of Living Relief Act, 1973. PLD1983SC15rel.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL NIIAN, J.‑‑This petition is directed against an order dated 7‑4‑1988 passed by the learned Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi in Application No. KAR‑280 of 1985 under section 50 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance filed by respondent No. 2 for interpretation of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 29‑5‑1984 with regard to set‑off of the increase in wages of 13.5% payable under the Employees Cost of Living (Relief) (Amendment) Act, 1985, which was allowed by the learned Appellate Tribunal in favour of the respondent No.
2. The petitioner being aggrieved has filed the present petition.
2. In support of the above petition Mr. Ali Amjad, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently urged that since the petitioner had filed an affidavit to the effect that the increase in the salary/wages to the extent of Rs.70 per month was made with effect from 1st January, 1984 by respondent No. 2, for the reason that the salary/wages in the other similar mills were higher and since there was no counter‑affidavit, the learned Sind Appellate Tribunal should have allowed respondent No. 2's above application.
3. It will suffice to observe that the Charter of Demands made by the petitioner does not indicate that any of the demands related to the increase of salary/wages on account of the fact that in the similar mills the salary/wages were higher. On the contrary para. 1 of the Charter of Demands clearly indicates that the same was made on account of the increase in the cost of living. Under the settlement in question the respondent No. 2 has allowed Rs.70 per month increase the salary/wages with effect from f‑i‑1084 as observed herein above. In our view, the learned Sind Appellate Tribunal has rightly relied upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of R.B. Industries Ltd. v. Employees Welfare Union and another P L D 1983 S C 15 relevant at page
18. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that an employer is entitled to set off any amount paid by him on account of increase in the cost of living while making payment of statutory increase of cost of living allowance under tire Cost of Living Allowance Act. The petition has no merits and, therefore, it is dismissed in limine. A.A./C ‑72/K Petition dismissed.