ZAHID MAJID versus LABOUR OFFICER AND INSPECTOR OF FACTORIES, SUKKUR
Article 199 West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), section 2 (e) (vii) and 7 (2) litigation over non-payment of legal dues, allegedly by the applicant company director. On canteen employees operated on The applicant company contested the complaint that it was not liable for payment of legal liabilities because the canteen was run by an independent contractor, not by the company, which was the employer of the said employees, from the applicant's application request. Is requesting his name be deleted. The questions that were rejected by the Labor Court were to consider whether the applicant violated any of the Standing Orders clause, whether the company could care for and operate the canteen for the workers themselves and the canteen staff May be considered as persons employed by the Company. The case was remanded to the Labor Court to allow the parties to present evidence on the factual aspect of the dispute and to decide the questions, the applicant company being subject to the relevant laws and rules of canteen staff Can be treated as an employer
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
