Grievance notice

Petitioner / Gujranwala Electric Supply Company was aggrieved of acceptance of grievance notice of respondents / employees whose services were terminated

Plea raised by petitioner / Company was that it was not an industry

Validity

Any entity which is involved in electrical undertakings falls within the definition of an industry

Main role of petitioner / Company is distribution, service and sale of electric power; the same falls within the definition of an industry and provisions of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 are applicable to its employees

According to Art. 175 of the Constitution, Government has jurisdiction to establish Courts for various subjects

Labour Courts have been established under the provisions of Labour Laws enacted by the relevant government, the same cannot be denuded of their powers to deal with a matter covered under the provisions of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968

High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by the Courts below as their findings were unexceptionable

Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.

Worker was legally bound to issue grievance notice to the employer within three months of the day on which cause of such grievance arose

Worker approached the wrong forum by filing civil suit which was dismissed

Worker instead of issuance of grievance notice, personally sent legal notice through counsel

Worker himself was bound to send grievance notice to the employer

No such grievance notice was sent which was mandatory and legal notice issued could not be termed as a "grievance notice"

Application filed by the worker before the Labour Court was not maintainable

Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Employee was charge-sheeted for misappropriation of cash amount received from customer during his service and after codal formalities he was terminated from service

Employee filed grievance petition before Labour Court that was accepted and punishment was modified by reduction to previous post

Appeal was preferred against on the grounds that employee had been terminated in accordance with law after he had admitted the allegations levelled

Bank (Employer) also averred that grievance notice was required to be submitted within thirty days and grievance petition was time barred

Employee contented that he was terminated without show-cause notice and regular enquiry

Validity

Employee was required to file grievance notice within prescribed time of thirty days but it had been filed beyond prescribed time of limitation and no application for condonation of delay was filed with it

When grievance notice to Bank (employer) was not served within specified time, employee could not approach competent court of jurisdiction for redressal of his grievance unless delay of each day was explained satisfactorily since valuable rights had accrued to employer

Court was supposed to determine question of limitation whether such plea was raised or not.

Counsel for employer, had contended that as grievance notice was addressed by the employee to Manager of employer/Hotel under S.2(h) of the Pakistan Hotels and Restaurants Act, 1976, same was not a valid grievance notice

Validity

Since grievance notice was replied by the competent authority i.e. Incharge, who had terminated the employment of the employee, objection regarding non-service of the grievance notice on the terminating authority, in view of said particular fact, had become hyper technical and was repelled, in circumstances.

Purpose of serving of grievance notice was to bring the grievance of the employee in the notice of employer before approaching the Labour Court

Law/Legislature, had not provided a specific format for serving the grievance notice

Submission and receiving of applications filed by the employee for release of his salary with the averment that he was performing his duty, having not been disputed by the employers, grievance notice had been fully served in the shape of said applications.