2000 PLP 292 (PLC)

11. Reference was also made to an agreement, dated 1st March, 1993 (Annexure A/3, pp.95 to 107 of R&P to Case No.1 of 1995), arrived at between the Employees Group of Companies Hydari Ghee Industries and Ghulam Muhammad Dakhan, the Managing Director of the applicants/management. Under this agreement, the details of the sale of the Hydari Ghee Industries were settled, which run in several pages, where under, it was, inter alia, agreed that. "Hydari Ghee Industries Ltd. has assumed the entire liability arising on account of golden handshake scheme. Further Hydari Ghee Industries Ltd. shall be responsible for all liabilities that may crop up in future as a result of all pending suits, claims etc., or those that may arise in future in respect of all assets, transaction and rights exercised whatsoever of Hydari Industries Limited. The remaining 65 workers from the list provided to the Privatisation Commission shall be paid Golden Hand Shake equal to 1 + 4 basic + cola + index pay for each completed year of service as announced by the Federal Government within 40 days of the take over by the party of the second part. Besides these salaries the party of the second part shall also provide golden handshake on the basis 1+2 to those employees who wish to discontinue their service such employees shall opt for this facility if so desired through their C.B.A. within a period of two months of the take over by the party of the second part. This payment shall be made within 40 days of the option received." (Page 4).

12. Representative of the workers also referred to settlement, dated 3‑3‑1993 (Annexure A/6, pp. 165‑175 of R&P in Case No.1 of 1995). By this agreement, it was, inter alia, undertaken by the management that the dues of the workers undergo golden handshake including gratuity, will be paid within the time specified therein.

13. He also referred to agreement,. dated 25‑1‑1994 (at page 139 of R&P in Case No.9 of 1995) between Hydari Ghee Industries, the applicants and the workers of Hydari Ghee Industries.

14. The management, having failed to honour its commitment, the workers approached the Deputy Director Labour (Conciliation) Hyderabad, who, after calling the management and the workers, drew up the agreement, dated 25‑1‑1994, which was signed by S. Farhat Ali, Labour Welfare Officer Hydari Ghee Industries Limited and as many as ten workers. It was also signed by Deputy Director Labour (Conciliation), Hyderabad, putting his round seal and date 25‑1‑1995, thereunder this is a conciliation agreement arrived at between the management and the workers through the efforts of the Government Agency i.e. the Deputy Director Labour (Conciliation) Hyderabad. Under this agreement, it was clearly agreed that the workers will receive their dues i.e. golden handshake and provident fund on or before 10‑4‑1994, but the management did not act upon this conciliation agreement too.

15. It, therefore, appears that the learned counsel for the management did not place full facts. He simply ignored all the agreements between the parties, as referred to above except the first one, between the Committee. He also simply ignored the letters, written by the management, dated 8th March, 1993 (Annexure A/2 of Original Case No.9 of 1995), addressed to Muhammad Ramzan which amounts to settlement entered into between the workers individually as well, whereby they were relieved of their jobs under Golden Hand Shake. The letter, for the sake of convenience is reproduced as under: Hydari Ghee Industries Ltd., P/5, S.I.T.E. P.O. Box No. 101, Hyderabad No.HGIL/ADMN/001 8th March, 1993 Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Shamshuddin Dear Sir, Please refer your application, dated 23‑5‑1992 opting for Golden Hand Shake Scheme. We are pleased to inform you that keeping in view your long association with Hyderi Industries Limited and the valuable service rendered by you, the management has decided to entertain your request and relieve you from service under Golden Hand Shake Scheme as per the agreement, dated 15‑10‑1991 executed between Privatization Commission, Government of Pakistan and All Pakistan State Enterprises Workers' Action Committee. You are, therefore, hereby informed that you will stand relieved from service w.e.f. 10‑3‑1993 (A.N.). You are advised to please collect your dues plus the additional amount of Golden Hand Shake equal to 4 (four) months' gratuity for every completed year of service from Accounts Department in full and final settlement of your dues. Payment of dues will be reposed by 10th of April, 1993. The agreement of Hydari Ghee Industries Limited wishes you good luck and successful completion of your future plans. Thanking you. Your faithfully, For Hydari Ghee Industries Ltd., (Sd.) 8‑3‑93 (Muhammad Ahmed Shaikh), secretary to the Board/Manager (Audit & Corp. Affairs) Learned counsel for the management also failed to make any mention of the cheques having been issued by the management in payment of the dues of the workers; which are available on record. All the cheques were dishonored. When it was inquired from the representative of workers what action did he take after the cheques were dishonored, he submitted that he went to the Court of Magistrate and Sub Divisional Magistrate, but these workers were so poor as could not engage any counsel to persue the matter there because the respondents the Managing Director, happened to be very, influential person and the Hyderabad administration concerned was under his thumb, which is evident from the fact that after passing of the decision, dated 30‑7‑1997, impugned in the above revisions, wherein it was inter alia, ordered that dues be recovered as land revenue, as submitted by the representative application was made to the concerned authority for attaching the property of the management, but to no avail in spite of the fact that there was no stay order, passed by this Tribunal on the above revisions.

16. In support of his submission that section 51 of the I.R.O., 1969 was not attracted, Mr. Rizvi, learned counsel for the management, placed his reliance on a number of cases namely Avalene Silk Mills v. Second Sindh Labour Court, Karachi and 7 others (1981 PLC 4) by a Single Bench of our own High Court. The learned Single Judge of the High Court, referring to the Law of Contract and also case for Siemens (Pakistan) Employees' Union v. Siemens (Pakistan) Engineering Company and 2 others (1969 PLC_341) held that if a period of time in settlement is fixed by contract, the contract will automatically lapse after that period. In the second case reported as Hostellarie‑De‑France Staff and Workers' Union v. Messrs Hostellarie‑De France (1983 PLC 1195) by the then Chairman of this Tribunal, it was held that, "benefits or rights conferred by settlement in the circumstances, could not be enforced for period after expiry of settlement itself". In the third case reported as Messrs Pfizer Laboratories Ltd. and another v. Irfan Ahmed (1999 PLC 391) by this Tribunal, it was held by me that the precondition for the maintainability of application under section 51 of the I.R.O., 1969 is the existence of any "Decision, award or settlement" by an Arbitrator, Labour Court and Tribunal which was completely lacking in the said case. The last case on the plea, as relied on by the learned counsel for the management, is reported as M/s. Tobacco International Ltd., Karachi v. Chairman, Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi and 2 others (1993 PLC 87) by a Division Bench of our own High Court, relying on the case of Karachi Club v. Muhammad Farooq, decided on 6‑8‑1985 in C.P. No.B‑552 of 1981. Section 51 was interpreted as under:‑‑-- "It appears from the text of section 51 reproduced above that it envisages recovery of money due from an employer under the settlement, or under an award or decision of the Arbitrator, Labour Court or Tribunal as arrears of land revenue or as public demand, but this section does not provide for determination of any claim against an employer. "

17. All the four cases, referred to above, relate to different situations and circumstances and are distinguishable as such. In the instant case, there are more than one settlement between the workers and the management as well as workers and the management through Conciliator. The amounts are fully determined. No enquiry for determining the amounts due in terms of money was required in the instant case and, as such, the plea, advanced on behalf of the management, is misconceived and is repelled.

18. For the 'aforesaid discussion, the revision applications are misconceived and are dismissed accordingly.

19. The applicant management is directed to pay the dues of the respondents herein, within ten days from the date of this order, failing which, the respondents/workers will be entitled to seek their remedy, as provided in law for implementation.

20. Before parting with the matter it may be added that it seems to be a self‑evident case of clear exploitation of poor labourers by capitalists dominated society in the "Islamic Republic of Pakistan". The employer needs to be reminded a hadith of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alayhi wa‑sallam) who commanded: "Pay the worker his wages before his perspiration does not dry". And each one of us should remember what Allah Almighty said in His Book in Surah Al‑Tawbah, verse 105, translation whereof by A. Yousaf Ali, read us under:‑-- And say: "Work (righteousness): Soon will God observe your work. And His Apostle and the Believers: Soon will ye be brought back To the Knower of what is Hidden and what is open: Then will. He show you The truth of all thatye did." H.B.T./454/K (Lb. Trib.) Revisions dismissed.