2009 PLC 292 (PLP)
CITIZENS FOUNDATION Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and others
| Citation | 2009 PLC 292 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Moosa K. Leghari, Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery and Sarmad Jalal Osmany, JJ |
| Parties | CITIZENS FOUNDATION Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and others |
| Primary Law | Provincial Employees' Social Security Ordinance (X of 1965) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLC 292 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Provincial Employees' Social Security Ordinance (X of 1965) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLC 292 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Muhammad Moosa K. Leghari, Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery and Sarmad Jalal Osmany, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLC 292 (PLP) (CITIZENS FOUNDATION Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Qazi Faez Isa, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner (in C.P. No.328-K of 2008).
- S.A. Sarwana, Advocate Supreme Court and K.A. Wahab, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.3 (in C.P. No.328-K of 2008).
- Habibullah, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. No.334-K of 2008).
- S.A. Sarwana, Advocate Supreme Court and K.A. Wahab, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.1 (in C.P. No:334-K of 2008).
- Date of hearing: 24th September, 2008.
- Shahid Anwar Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court and Suleman
- SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.--- Mr. Qazi Faez Isa, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner in C.P. No.328-K of 2008 has submitted that the impugned judgment, dated 25-4-2008 passed by the learned Sindh High Court, whereby the petitioner has been directed to get its employees registered with the Sindh Employees Social Security Ordinance, 1965, is defective as inter alia, it does not take into consideration. the fact that the petitioner is a charitable organization and rendering exemplary services in the educational sector by ,providing free education, etc. to the lower income group of Pakistan citizens. Learned Advocate Supreme Court has also relied upon Don Bosco High School, Empress Road, Lahore v. Director, Social Security and 2 others 2005 PLC 110 for the proposition that even otherwise schools have been held not to come within the definition of the term "Establishment" as per section 2(11) of the Ordinance.
- 2. On the other hand, Mr. S.A. Sarwana, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing on behalf of respondents Nos.1 and 3, respectively in both cases has fully supported the impugned judgment and submitted that the definition of the term "Establishment" occurring in section 2(11) of the Ordinance, 1965, is sufficiently wide to cover schools though run by charitable organizations because the word "otherwise" appearing at the end of the section is not to be read ejusdem generis as held by this Court in Don Bosco High School v. Assistant Director E.O.B.I. and others PLD 1989 SC 128. According to him, though the cited case was in relation to Employees Old Age Benefits Act, the provisions thereof are in pari materia to that of the Ordinance as both are benevolent pieces of legislation designed to provide relief to the low income group employees. Further, learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that in the case of schools, this Court in C.As. Nos.1550 to 1557 of 2000 and C.As. Nos.2611, 2612 and 2614 of 2014, has remanded the matters to the Social Security Institution since a factual inquiry was involved as regards the contention that said schools were providing adequate pecuniary and other benefits to its employees.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 25-4-2008 passed by the High Court of Sindh, Karachi in C.P. Nos.D-165 of 2006, D-1478 of 2003 and D-2108 of 1996).
Ss. 2(11) & 3
Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art.185(3)
Registration of employees with the institution-Petitioner had impugned direction of High Court, whereby it was directed to get its employees registered with the institution
Contention of the petitioner was that as the petitioner was a charitable organization rendering exemplary services in the educational sector by providing free education it was not "establishment" and provisions of Provincial Employees' Social Security Ordinance, 1965 were not applicable to it
Respondent had supported impugned judgment of the High Court contending that provisions of Provincial Employees' Social Security Ordinance, 1965 were applicable in the case of the petitioner as it was "establishment" as defined in S.2(11) of the Ordinance
Leave to appeal was granted to consider that important issue. Don Bosco High School, Empress Road, Lahore v. Director, Social Security and 2 others 2005 PLC 110 and Don Bosco High School v. Assistant Director, E.O.B.I. and others PLD 1989 SC 128 ref. Shahid Anwar Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court and Suleman
Judgment & Decree
SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.
Mr. Qazi Faez Isa, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner in C.P. No.328-K of 2008 has submitted that the impugned judgment, dated 25-4-2008 passed by the learned Sindh High Court, whereby the petitioner has been directed to get its employees registered with the Sindh Employees Social Security Ordinance, 1965, is defective as inter alia, it does not take into consideration. the fact that the petitioner is a charitable organization and rendering exemplary services in the educational sector by ,providing free education, etc. to the lower income group of Pakistan citizens. Learned Advocate Supreme Court has also relied upon Don Bosco High School, Empress Road, Lahore v. Director, Social Security and 2 others 2005 PLC 110 for the proposition that even otherwise schools have been held not to come within the definition of the term "Establishment" as per section 2(11) of the Ordinance.
2. On the other hand, Mr. S.A. Sarwana, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing on behalf of respondents Nos.1 and 3, respectively in both cases has fully supported the impugned judgment and submitted that the definition of the term "Establishment" occurring in section 2(11) of the Ordinance, 1965, is sufficiently wide to cover schools though run by charitable organizations because the word "otherwise" appearing at the end of the section is not to be read ejusdem generis as held by this Court in Don Bosco High School v. Assistant Director E.O.B.I. and others PLD 1989 SC
128. According to him, though the cited case was in relation to Employees Old Age Benefits Act, the provisions thereof are in pari materia to that of the Ordinance as both are benevolent pieces of legislation designed to provide relief to the low income group employees. Further, learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that in the case of schools, this Court in C.As. Nos.1550 to 1557 of 2000 and C.As. Nos.2611, 2612 and 2614 of 2014, has remanded the matters to the Social Security Institution since a factual inquiry was involved as regards the contention that said schools were providing adequate pecuniary and other benefits to its employees.
3. We have heard both the learned counsel. In our opinion, none of the judgments placed before us address the issue whether in view of the charitable nature of any organization, the provisions of the Sindh Employees Social Security Ordinance, 1965, would apply. Hence, we would grant leave to appeal to consider this important issue. H.B.T./C-8/SC Leave granted.