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.
Civil Appeals Nos. 183, 184 of 1979 and K‑83 of 1980, decided on 5th December 1983.
(On appeal from the Order dated 17th February, 1979 of High Court of Sind, Karachi, passed in Constitution Petitions NOS. 220, 222 and 217 of 1976),
------S.25‑A(6) [as amended by Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 1973]‑Termination of service‑Notice under S. 25‑A before instituting proceedings in Labour Court against order of termination of service not necessary‑Aggrieved worker could seek his remedy against termination of his employment directly from Junior Labour Court.
Iftikhar Elahi v. Butt Engineering Industries 1982 S C M R 1207 ref.
Syed Riaz Ahmad Peerzada, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellants.
Maulvi Sirajul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Afzal Siddiqui, Advocate‑on‑Record (in C. As. Nos. 183, 184 of 1979) for Respondent No. 1.
Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant (in C. A. No. K‑83 of 1980).
Maulvi Sirajul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Afzal Siddiqui, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 1 (in C. A. No. K‑83 of 1980).
Respondents Nos, 2 and 3 : Ex parte.
Date of hearing : 5th December, 1983.
In these three appeals the common question for consideration is as to whether notice impugning the termination of service is mandatory under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordi nance, 1969 before instituting proceedings in a Labour Court for setting it aside. Factually in none of these cases such as notice was given.
The High Court relying on the case of Nasim Silk Industries v. Fifth Sind Labour Court and others (P L D 1977 Kar. 793), held that it was necessary and gave the relief. But it seems that the High Court failed to notice that after the judgment in this case subsection (6) was inserted in section 25‑A on 9th of February, 1973, by the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 1973, which did away with the requirement of notice. This subsection was construed by this Court and it was held that the aggrieved worker could seek his remedy against the termination of his employment directly from the Junior Labour Court. Reference in this connection may be made to Iftikhar Elahi v. Butt Engineering Industries (1982 S C M R 1207).
Accordingly, these appeals succeed and are allowed, but with no order as to costs.
M. Z. M. Appeal accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer