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‑191 of 1982, heard on
‑‑‑S. 2 (i) & S. O. 12 (3)‑Security Guard‑Sole duty as Chow kidar‑Not a workman‑Grievance petition against termination of service of such person‑Not maintainable‑Grievance petition Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25‑A.
Ch. M. Maarif for Appellant.
Date of hearing :
This appeal is directed against a decision of the learned Fourth Labour Court, given on 23‑2‑1982, dismissing the grievance petition of the appellant workman against his dismissal from service by the respondent‑Corporation. The learned Labour Court, in its impugned decision, has held that as the appellant himself has admitted that he is employed as a security guard and that he performed no other duty except the job of a Chowkidar at outer gate No. 3 of the Mechine Tool Factory, the grievance petition of the appellant was not maintainable, he not being a workman for the purposes of the Standing Orders. In support of its view the learned
2. Mr. Ch. M. Maarif was unable to refute the admission of the appellant himself that he was employed as a security guard and his sole duty was that of a Chowkidar at the outher gate of the factory. This being the position, the appellant ‑would not come within the definition of workman as defined in the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 and hence would not be entitled file grievance petition under clause (3) of Standing Order 12 read wit section 25‑A, I. R. O. I would, accordingly, dismiss the 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