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. HYD‑71 of 1981, heard on 22nd February, 1981.
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)‑
‑‑S. 1 (4)‑Work charged employee of Government‑Brought on regular establishment‑A civil servant under Sind Civil Servants Act, 1973 and subject to rules framed thereunder‑Outside ambit of Ordinance‑Not entitled to grievance petition before Labour Court against order of removal from service‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25‑A.
Wasiullah Qureshi for Appellant.
Date of hearing : 22nd February 1981.
The sole point which falls for consideration in the instant appeal is whether the appellant is not a workman for the purposes of the Sind Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 and accordingly is not entitled to file and maintain a grievance petition against his removal from service as held by the learned VIth Labour Court, against whose decision the present appeal has been filed.
2. It has been admitted by the appellant himself in his grievance petition that the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules are applicable to him. It has further been admitted by him that although originally he was borne on the work charged establishment, his services have been regularized and he is enjoying all the privileges and benefits of a regular Government servant. These benefits and advantages carry with them the corresponding responsibilities of a Government servant. It was, however, contended by Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi, the learned Repre sentative for the appellant, that although the Efficiency and Discipline Rules applicable to Government servants are applicable also to the appellant, yet the said Rules have been made applicable to him not under a Statute but by means of an executive Notification. Time was given to Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi to produce the said notification but he has not been able to do so. It is further contended by Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi that though the benefits and advantages of a regular Government servant and a regular employee have been conferred upon the appellant, he nevertheless continues to be a work‑charged employee and thus not a civil servant for the purposes of the Sind Civil Servants Act, 1973. This contention also has no force. Since the appellant was brought on the regular establishment and was given all the privileges, emoluments, and advantages of a regular Government servant, he has ceased to be a work‑charged employee and is to be deemed to be a civil servant, as he holds a civil post in connection with the affairs of the Province of Sind As such, the Civil Servants Act, 1973, and the Rules framed there under, including the Efficiency and Discipline Rules would be applicable to him. Furthermore, by reason of the first proviso to subsection (4) of section I of the Sind Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, the Standing Order would not be applicable to him.
3. For the foregoing reasons, I am of the view that the grievance petition filed by the appellant against his removal from service was not maintainable. I would accordingly dismiss this appeal in limine.
Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer