Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Application No. 1 of 1971, decided on 5th April 1972.
S. 51‑Pro visions not applicable to seek re‑instatement‑Court not empowered do recover dues of workman from employer‑Workman praying for re‑instatement and payment of dues in pursuance of award of Labour Court‑Workman in circumstances, held, entitled to wages foe entire period kept out of employment despite award of Labour Court for re‑instatement and advised to move Provincial Government for recovery of dues.
Wasi Ahmad for Applicant.
Nemo for Respondent.
In this application under section 51 of the Industrial Relations ordinance, 1969 the applicant seeks re‑instatement in service and payment of his dues.
The applicant's case is that he is the workman of the respon dent Industries and is the General Secretary of 'Shan Industries Mazdoor Union which is a registered Trade Union. The applicant‑Union had filed Application No. 318‑70, under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. in the First Labour Court, Karachi, seeking his re‑instatement in service and payment of dues. The Court passed an award on 16th December 1970, whereby it was directed that the applicant be re‑instated in service with full back benefits and continuity in service. This award is Annexure 'A' of the application. The applicant thereafter, made several requests in writing to the respondents to comply with the Award of the Court, but the respondents refused to do so. He has produced these applications as Annexures 'B', 'C' and 'C‑2'. Consequently, he has moved this application for the enforcement of the Award.
The respondents, in their Reply Statement, state that the Award was passed in their absence and without their knowledge, as no notice or summons of the application were served upon them. Therefore, they were not bound to comply with the Award till they had availed of the remedies for getting it set aside. However, after filing the Reply Statement, the respondents remained absent continuously since 15th June 1971. Several summons and notices were sent to them during this period but none appeared on their behalf. Consequently, there is no evidence led by respondents. The applicant has sworn affidavit in support of his contention and also produced the documents mentioned above.
Now, section 51 does not provide for the re‑instatement of the employee nor does it empower the Court to recover the dues of the workmen from the Employer. Subsection (2) of this section, however, provides that the benefit which the workman is entitled to receive from the Employer if capable of being computed in terms of money, shall be determined by the Court and then the workman will move the Provincial Government for the recovery of that amount as provided in subsection (1). The Representative for the applicant has given the statement on claim of the wages of the applicant for the determination by this Court, as follows:‑
| Rs. 1. Claim for the period from 2nd March 1970 to 31st January 1971 @ Rs. 13.60 per day as shown in the application under section 51 of Industrial Relations Ordi nance --- --- --- 4,556.00 2. Claim for the period from 1st February 1971 to 31st March 1972 @ Rs. 13.60 per day works out to --- --- --- 5,712.00 Total --- --- --- 10,268.00 |
Therefore, I find that the applicant is entitled to recover the dues as mentioned above in his Claim Statement. The applicant may move the Provincial Government for the recovery of his dues from the respondents as provided in subsection (1) of section 51 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer