Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. 236 of 1974, decided on 30th November 1975.

----S. 1(3) -Building company constructing bridge of high national importance on contract through Organisation under Defence Ministry Funds for construction allocated from Civil Estimates and not from Defence Estimates-Bridge under construction not to be used by Armed Forces exclusively-Mere fact of construction of bridge being assigned to Organisation administratively controlled by Defence Ministry, held, cannot give such bridge character of an installation connected with or incidental to Armed Forces"-Employee of such company, held, does not fall within expression "person employed in Defence Services of Pakistan and any Service or installation connected wits or incidental to Armed Forces".

Gammon (Pak.) Ltd. Rawalpindi v. Muzaffar Khan and seven others 1974 P L C 10 distinguished.

Abdur Rashid Raja for Appellant.

M. G. Saadullah Mumtaz for Respondent.

This is an appeal against the order dated 23-10-1974 of the Junior Labour Court, Rawalpindi whereby the said learned Court dismissed an application for re-instatement cited by the appellant under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 against his employer, the respondent.

2. Khuda Bux appellant was employed by the respondent at monthly wages of Rs.450 on 24-7-1973. His services were terminated by the respondent on 25.7-1974 on the charge of misconduct. The appellant filed a petition under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 before the learned Court below seeking re-instatement and challenging the validity of tire order of his termination on the ground that tile said order was made in violation of the provisions of Standing Order 15 of West Pakistan Industrial & Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance. 1968.

3. The respondent resisted the appellant's petition and pleaded Inter alia that the appellant was employed by the respondent in connection with the construction of Daur Bridge which was purely a Defence Project and, therefore provisions of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 could not be availed of by the appellant.

4. The learned Court below considering the preliminary objection of the respondent concluded that the respondent's Company was working in connection with a Defence Project and the employment of the appellant was also in connection with the said project and hence the Court had no jurisdic tion to grant relief to the appellant.

5. I have carefully gone through the record of the cage. Parties have also been heard at a considerable length. the respondent in this case is a private construction Company working with the name and style of United Builders and Associates, 34, Al-Abbas Market, Adamji Road, Rawalpindi. Thus the respondent-Company itself is obviously not a part of the Armed Forces of Pakistan. Nasir Ahmad a witness who appeared 1 on behalf of the respondent before the learned Court below stated that Daur Bridge was being constructed through Frontier Works Organization which was an Organization under the Defence Ministry and that the said Organization had given contract for the construction of the said bridge to respondent-Company. The witness however admitted that the funds for the construction of this bridge were not from Defence Estimate bat were allocated from Civil Estimates. The witness stared that he issued the letter Exh. RA. The contents of the letter Exh. RA suggest that Headquarter, Frontier Works Organization, confirmed through this letter that Daur Bridge was of high national importance. Construction of this bridge was being execu ted through Defence Organization.

6. Subsection (3) of section 1 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 provides that the I. R. O. shall not apply to any person employed on the Police or any of the Defence Services of Pakistan and any services or installation connected with or incidental to the Armed Forces of Pakistan including an Ordnance Factory maintained by the Federal Government.

7. As already stated services of United Builders and Associates to is obviously not a Defence Services of Pakistan. Daur Bridge in connection with which the appellant was employed has nothing to do with any Ordnance Factory maintained by the Federal Government. In this manner the only aspect to be seen is as to whether Daur Bridge was connected with or incidental to the Armed Forces of Pakistan or not, The answer would be in the negative, in as much as according to the contents of letter Exh. RA this bridge is of high national importance. Its construction is -related to Karakuram Highway. This highway is not to be used exclusively by the Armed Forces of Pakistan. It is meant for use of general public and the Armed Forces as well. The mere fact that the construction of the said Highway and the bridge in question has been assigned to an organization which is administratively under the Defence Ministry would not in any manner give this bridge the character of an installation connected with or incidental to the Armed Forces of Pakistan. This conclusion is further fortified by the fact that the funds for the construction of this bridge have been met out of the civil estimates. The judicial precedent "Gammon (Pak.) Ltd., Rawalpindi v. Muzaffar Khan and seven others (1974 P L C 10) relied upon by the learned Court below is distinguishable on merits in as much as in that case the concerned workers were employed in connection with the works directly connected with the Pakistan Ordnance Factory.

8. In view of the above, the findings recorded by the learned Court below are not sustainable. I, therefore, accept the appeal, set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the learned Court below with the direction that it may be decided afresh on merits in accordance with law. Parties have been directed to appear before the Junior Labour Court, Rawalpindi for further proceedings on 14-12-1974.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.