1997 PLC 13 (PLP)
ALAMGIR and others Versus Messrs DADA BHOY SILK MILLS LTD. and others
| Citation | 1997 PLC 13 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtaq Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | ALAMGIR and others Versus Messrs DADA BHOY SILK MILLS LTD. and others |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLC 13 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 PLC 13 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtaq Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 PLC 13 (PLP) (ALAMGIR and others Versus Messrs DADA BHOY SILK MILLS LTD. and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Appellant in person. M. Latif Saghar for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 7th February, 1996.
- 5. The Advocate for the appellants is absent. Only one appellant Mr. Alamgir is present in person. He admits that he has no appointment order, card or ticket to show that he was employee of the Silk Mills. The burden lies on the appellants workmen to prove their relationship of employment with the respondent‑Mills. In the absence of any evidence it cannot be said that these 11 workmen were employees of the Silk Mills. The petitions of these workmen have therefore rightly been dismissed. There is no ground for interference with the decision of the Labour Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Headnotes / Summary
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 25‑A‑‑‑Relationship of employee and employer‑‑‑Proof of‑‑‑Relationship of employee and employer having been denied by employer, burden lay on employees to prove that they were their employees‑‑‑Employees had themselves admitted that they had no appointment orders, cards or tickets to show that they were employees of respondent‑‑‑In absence of any evidence, it could not be said that appellants were employees of respondent‑‑‑Grievance petition filed by appellants/petitioners were rightly dismissed by Labour Court in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Appellant in person. M. Latif Saghar for Respondents. Date of hearing: 7th February, 1996. This appeal arises from order of the Third Sindh Labour Court, Karachi dismissing the petition of the appellants under section 25‑A of the I.R.O.
2. It is the case of the appellants that they were employees of Dada Bhoy Silk Mills the respondent, and working in the Dyeing Section. That on 9‑9‑1990 they were gate‑stopped and their services were terminated.
3. It is the case of the respondents that the appellants were not their employees and the Dyeing Section had been given to Mr. Farooq Shaikh on contract basis.
4. The learned Labour Court held that the workmen had not proved their relationship of workers and employers and there was no evidence to suggest that the appellants had ever been employed by the Silk Mills.
5. The Advocate for the appellants is absent. Only one appellant Mr. Alamgir is present in person. He admits that he has no appointment order, card or ticket to show that he was employee of the Silk Mills. The burden lies on the appellants workmen to prove their relationship of employment with the respondent‑Mills. In the absence of any evidence it cannot be said that these 11 workmen were employees of the Silk Mills. The petitions of these workmen have therefore rightly been dismissed. There is no ground for interference with the decision of the Labour Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./146/Lb.S Appeal dismissed