' ZIA PERWAZ, J.---This appeal is directed against the order of Sindh Labour Court No,III dated 9-10- 1999 whereby the application under section 25-A of the then Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as IRO 1969) moved by the appellant was dismissed.
' Brief facts are that the appellant Taj Muhammad filed application under section 25-A of IRO, 1969 claiming to be a permanent employee of the respondent. He was dismissed from service without any show-cause notice or inquiry contrary to the provisions of Standing Orders 12(3) and 15 of the Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 and claims reinstatement with full back-benefits.
' The respondent No,2 opposed the application on the ground that the employment of the appellant to the post of Stenotypist for the purpose of completion of a specific project namely Rousch Powers Project. Initially the project was expected to be completed within a period of one year. However, due to delay the period of completion of project was extended. Corresponding extension in the services of the appellant was therefore allowed. On completion of the project the services of the appellant were terminated in pursuance of the terms of his appointment.
' There was no necessity for issue of any show-cause notice or inquiry. Reliance was placed on the letter of appointment and the letter of extension issued to the appellant.
' On 20-1-2004 as a last chance the case was adjourned to 18-1-2005 at the request of the learned counsel for the appellant. On 18-1-2005 again learned counsel for the appellant requested for adjournment. Today also the case has been called repeatedly since morning. The appellant and his counsel failed to appear and argue the case and even no intimation has been received on their behalf.
' Mr. Umer Hayat, learned counsel for respondent No,1 has advanced arguments. In support of his contention he has referred to the terms of appointment of the appellant as contained in the letter of appointment. He argued that in view of such circumstances, the appellant is not entitled to the relief prayed for in this appeal. In support of his contention learned counsel has relied upon the cases of WAPDA and others v. Khanimullah and others (2000 SCM R 879), Pakistan International Airlines v. Sindh Labour Court No,5 and others (PLD 1980 SC 323) and Muhammad Yaqoob v. Punjab Labour Court No,1 and 5 others (1990 SCM R 1539).
' Heard the learned counsel and perused the material available on record. To arrive at a conclusion, I would like to first reproduce the letter of appointment and the extension which are admitted documents and exhibited as Exh. AW/1 and AW/2:-- "Temporary appointment as Stenotypist for our Rousch Power Plant" project.
' Dear Mr. Muhammad: ' We are pleased to appoint you against a temporary post of Stenotypist of our above mentioned project, at Karachi with effect from 24-3-1997 for a period of one year on the following terms and conditions:--
1. The work for which you have been appointed is of an essentially temporary nature for above mentioned project which is likely to be finished within a period not exceeding one year. In any case your employment will stand automatically terminated with the completion of your part of the job on the said project, if not otherwise dispensed with earlier.
2. Your monthly remuneration has been fixed as under:-- Basic Salary Rs,3,620-00 House Rent Allowance Rs,1,630-00 Conveyance Allowance Rs .300-00 Special Allowance Rs .300-00 Cost of Living Allowance 1993 Rs,100-00 Cost of Living Allowance 1994 Rs,50-00 Total Rs,6 000-00 ' Over time rates shall be Rs,36.00 per hour.
3. You shall work on all working days of the week and observed the same timings as have been fixed by the Company.
4. You will be entitled to 12 working day's leave (1 leave per month).
5. Your services are liable to be transferred from one work place to another in connection with the execution of your duties. For which you will not be entitled to any additional salary and/or allowances.
6. You will comply with the instructions issued to you by your superiors in the execution of your duties and maintenance of discipline and also all others rules and regulations applicable from time to time, failing which your services are liable to be dispensed with as provided under the law.
7. Your services are liable to be terminated at any time without notice or pay in lieu of notice.
Similarly you can relinquish your employment without any notice or pay in lieu thereof.
8. It is to be clearly understood that your appointment is purely of temporary nature and you shall have no claim for being made permanent employee, nor would you be entitled to any benefits available to a permanent employee.
' If you agree to the above terms and conditions, please sign and return the copy of this letter as a token of your acceptance.
' We wish you all the best in your assignments. Yours faithfully.
' SIEMENS PAKISTAN ENGINEERING CO. LTD.
(Sd.) (Sd.)
D. Ansari Mehrin Zaidi General Manager Manager Finance and Business Human Resources Deptt.
Administration bivision. P.S. ' Your appointment will further be subject to your medical fitness declared by the Company.
Accepted: Taj Muhammad Signature (Sd.)
"EXTENSION OF PROJECT EMPLOYMENT Dear Mr. Muhammad ' We refer to your appointment letter No, HR 102/Mf/KI dated 19-3-1997 vide which you were appointed as Stenotypist w,e,f, 24-3-1997 for a period of one year exclusively for execution of "Rousch Power Plant" project. Since the project has not been completed nor the job on which you are working has ceased to exist, the company has decided to extend your period of employment upto 30-9-1998. However, in case the job on which you are working ceases to exist or the project is completed earlier your services shall be dispensed with as the case may be.
' All other terms and conditions of your employment with us remain unchanged.
' Please sign and return the copy of this letter as a token of your acceptance of the above.
' Yours faithfully ' SIEMENS PAKISTAN ENGINEERING CO. LTD.
(Sd.) (Sd.)
M. Sulger D. Ansari"
' The record reveals that there was no grievance or complaint regarding services rendered by the appellant. The appellants continued to remain on his service so far as the job requirements on the project were necessary and in fact his services were extended for a further period of six months, which goes to show that the employer offered him further extension when it was possible under the circumstances. However, when the project came to an end and services of the appellant were no longer required, and the same were terminated. Under the circumstances no show-cause notice inquiry is necessary and the impugned order does not suffer from any factual or legal infirmity. It is a settled principle of law that where nature of employment is with respect to a particular job or project and services of the employee attached to such project are terminated on completion of such project, the period of services is not relevant. In the case WAPDA and others (supra) it has been held as IC under:-- "After thorough scrutiny on the available material and relevant provisions of law, we are of the considered view that the respondents were employed on work-charged basis against a specified project, i,e, "Mardan Scrap". Therefore, on completion of work on the said project, their appointments were rightly terminated by the competent authority".
' In case of Pakistan International Airlines (supra) it has been observed as under:-- "We are constrained to observe with regret that the definitions in clauses (b) and (e), are difficult to construe, therefore, we are conscious that the task of the High Court was not easy, but in any view of the matter, we are unable to agree with the construction placed on clause (e) by the learned Single Judge. According to the learned Single Judge, the respondents had become permanent workmen solely, because they had been in the appellant's employment for more than nine months.
But, as submitted by Mr. Sarwana, this view ignores the words "likely to be" which precede the words finished within a period not exceeding nine months." Redundancy is not to be attributed lightly to the Legislature and the words "likely to be" were inserted because given the nature of human beings "work" expected to be finished within one month might not be finished during the period, because of human error, miscalculation, negligence or any other cause. And, the insertion of the words "likely to be" makes it clear that a workman cannot become a permanent workman if the work for which he was employed was expected to be finished within nine months, but was in fact completed after the expiry of nine months. This is obvious and Mr. Mohsen Ali did not even attempt to defend the sweeping observations of the learned Single Judge."
' Similarly in case of Muhammad Yaqoob (Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while refusing the leave to appeal was pleased to observe as under:- "If the work is not of a permanent nature, then howsoever long may be his employment, he cannot be taken to be a permanent workman. The length of the period of employment by itself has not been made the ground or a test for determining the nature of the work. Keeping in view the nature of the work on which the petitioner was employed, namely, an addition to the regular strength of Malis for the maintenance of the gardens and the grounds on daily wages or on work-charge basis, it cannot be said that such additional work being done by him was of permanent nature necessarily. As regards the stigma attaching to the permanence of his services, the petitioner has as witness admitted that the termination order was oral and not in writing."
' The terms of appointment, letter of extension of service and the evidence available on record of the learned trial Court show that the appellant was appointed on a specific job on the aforesaid project. The impugned order of the learned Labour Court does not suffer from any factual or legal infirmity in the light of the above-case law which is attracted to the facts of the present appeal. The appeal filed by the appellant is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed.