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.
Appeal No. KAR‑243 of 1976, decided on 8th December 1976.
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)--------‑
‑‑ S. O. 10‑C (1) & (4)‑Bonus‑Never paid on fixed rate in past-- Settlement also stating that bonus to be payable according to terms of S. O. 10‑C‑Bonus, held, rightly refused on account of loss to establishment.
S. Mumtazuddin for Applicant.
A. Hafiz for Respondent.
This is an appeal against the order of Labour Court dismissing the application made by the appellant under section 25‑A of I. R. O, 1969. The appellant was a permanent employee of W. P. I. D. C, According to certain settlements reached between the Corporation and the Workers, bonus was allowed at different rates. On 1‑3‑1972, settlement was reached providing the payment of bonus according to new Labour Policy. Apparently, this has reference to Standing Order 10‑C of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Sanding Orders) Ordinance, 1968. This was confirmed by another settlement dated 12‑3‑74. In the same month, the appellant was transferred to the State Heavy Engineering & Machine Tool Corporation Ltd. which is respondent in the present case. The old terms and conditions of service were guaranteed.
2, Since previously bonus was being paid according to the settlement taken place from time to time the appellant claimed the bones for the tear 1974‑75 that is, the period from July, 1974 to 30th June 1975. The respon dent did not accept the claim of appellant as no bonus was paid to any employee on account of heavy loss during that year. The appellant, there fore, approached the Labour Court after serving the grievance notice. The application was resisted and the Labour Court disallowed the claim and dismissed the application.
3. It was argued before me on behalf of the appellant that although according to S. O. 10‑C of the Standing Orders Ordinance, bonus was payable in case of profit but this was subject to clause (4) which laid down that despite what was contained in clause (1), bonus was payable in accordance with the terms of employment, usage, settlement or award and, 'therefore, the question of profit or loss did not arise. I find no force in this contention. It vas rightly pointed out by the Labour Court that at no time the bonus was paid at fixed rate and it wag changed from time to time. So, there was no question of terms of employment and usage. Even the claim of the appellant can't be based on any settlement as the latest settlement did not fix any amount of bonus but it depended upon the legal provision and, therefore, Standing Order 10‑C (i) will be applicable providing the payment of bonus in case any profit is made. Since there was no profit, the appellant was net entitled to any bonus. In this connection, I would also like to refer to the settlement dated 2‑10‑1974. A demand for bonus at the rate of 20% of the salary was made but subsequently this was dropped and it was agreed that existing practice would continue. This is contained under Demand No. 8(b). Existing practice obviously has reference to provision of Standing Order 10‑C of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968.
4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer