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. SG‑121 of 1984, decided on 11th July, 1984.
‑‑‑Ss. 25‑A, 36 & 38(3)‑‑Procedure and practice‑‑Courts have to record findings only on points in controversy between parties‑‑Labour Court dismissing grievance petition on grounds that petitioner (appellant) was not a workman as defined under West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968‑‑No such plea raised by respondent in written statement and appellant being unaware did not produce evidence with regard to duties performed by him‑‑Labour Court, in circumstances, held, could not record decision on such point‑ Order of Labour Court, in circumstances, set aside by Appellate Tribunal and case remanded to Labour Court for decision on merits.
1983 P L C 216 and 1983 P L C 652 ref.
Appellant in person.
Pervaiz Alamgir for Respondents.
Date of hearing; 4th July, 1984.
The appeal captioned above arises from the decision, dated 21‑2‑1984 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.5, Faisalabad, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his re‑instatement in service was dismissed.
2. The only ground on which the grievance petition of the appellant has been dismissed is that he is not a workman as defined in the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968. In the written statement no such plea was taken by the respondent, so the appellant, being unaware of it, did not produce evidence with regard to his duties. Needless to say that mere designation is not the deciding factor, whether an employee is or is not a workman only on the basis of duties the point of workman can be determined. The Courts have to record findings only on the points in controversy between the parties. As no plea was taken in the written statement that the appellant was not a workman no decision could be recorded on it. Learned lower Court has relied upon 1983 P L C 216 and 1983 P L C 652 but the rulings cannot be applied unless there is evidence on the record and nature of duties and facts are the same. As the learned lower Court has not recorded any finding on the merits of the case, the case is liable to be remanded.
3. As a result, the appeal is accepted and setting aside the impugned decision of the learned lower Court, the case is remanded back for decision on merits.
A. E.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer