Find a Lawyer

Application No. 273 of 1973, decided on 29th November 1973.

West Pakistan) Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1969)-

--- S. O. 1(b)--- Permanent workman"---Workman having served for 2 months given one month's notice of termination-Period of three months being completed during notice period-Management otherwise having ample work for such workman-Workman, in circumstances, held, permanent.

Mirza Nazir Ahmed Naz for Petitioner. Mirza Riaz Ahmed Chughtai for Respondent.

Nafees Printing Mills Workers' Union through its General Secretary has filed this application, under Order XXXIX, rule 2 of the C. P. C. and has alleged in it that a dispute between the Union and the Management is pending under section 32 (1-A) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, and the Management just to overawe, threaten and to victimise the workers have given notices for termination of services to its 15 workers. Management was asked to file a written reply and they have done so. Management has taken stand in their written reply that as they are temporary workers, therefore, Management is within its right to dispense with the services of the workers at any time after giving them one month's notice or pay in lieu of. Parties led their evidence. Exhs. P-3 and P-4 produced by the Union clearly show that there is ample work and it appears that the Management have given them notices just to get rid of them. Mr. Muhammad Nawaz, appeared on behalf of the Management and he is one of the partners and has admitted in his cross-examination that earlier to these workers we have never recruited temporary workers. He further volunteered that service period of all the 15 workers; a list of whom is attached with the petition was 21 months when Management gave them notices of retrenchment. It is clear, therefore, that one month's notice has been given to them keeping it in view the raw-material to be finished in that month. If they remain therefor that month they will become permanent workers as they would have completed three months' continuous service.

In view of the above discussion of the facts and evidence of the case I have come to the conclusion that they are permanent workers and there is ample work for them. They are being victimised, therefore, their services cannot be terminated for any other reason than misconduct or retrenchment. I, therefore, restrain the Management not to dispense with the services of these employees except as mentioned above.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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