Find a Lawyer

SHAHEEN AIRPORT SERVICES, KARACHI versus SINDH EMPLOYEES\' SOCIAL SECURITY INSTITUTION

Employers / Establishments have claimed that the payment of money claimed by the Social Security Institution to the payment of Section 2 (8) (30) and 20 contributions of the West Pakistan Employees Social Security Ordinance 1965. Does not come within working porters. Definition of term / employee definition and the amount of money received by the porter from the passenger and received by the employer does not fall into the definition of the term wage, thus the employer is responsible for paying the contribution to the porters. There was no clergyman who worked at the airport in confession with the employer-run establishment, usually working at least 24 hours a week. Travelers to the airport had to pay a certain amount of money for every trip to the porters, and the money was given by the employer and more money was paid to the porters and the smaller amount was paid to the porters. The remainder of the employer's compensation was retained, so the wages received by Porters fell into the realm, as stated in Arden, the employer of Ennis, 1965, that it could not establish that Porters was self-employed. That, while the evidence on the record has established the fact that the porters are employed by the employer, under the circumstances it was compelling Sruf take part in the social security fund for purrz. ask a advocate free from Kazi Ahmed lawyer