1. MD. NURUL HUDA (CHAIRMAN).-16-8-70 being Sunday, the record is put up today. Tae petitioner in this case, Ali Nabi Khan, has filed this case under section 25(1)(6) of the East Pakistan Employment of Labour (Standing Orders) Act, for benefits available to him under section 19 of the Act for termination of his service under the 2wrd party Gammon Ltd. The petitioner alleges that he was a Peon of the 2nd party at a monthly salary of Rs. 90 and his service was terminated on 24-12-69. The petitioner then submitted a grievance petition on 7-1-70 to which the 2nd party replied stating that the petitioner is entitled to no benefits.
2. 2nd party in spite of notice has not appeared to contest the case. So it has been heard ex parte.
3. We are to consider what benefits the petitioner is entitled to in this case.
4. The petitioner is alleging that he was appointed in service in February 1968 and that he is a permanent employee. He has referred to his appointment letter in his application which is dated 13-3-69. In his grievance petition also he referred to his appointment by this matter. So the story that the petitioner was appointed in service in February 1968 cannot be accepted. A copy of the appointment letter is before us. It does not show that the appointment of the petitioner was against any permanent vacancy, rather it was in connection with an item of construction likely to be completed within some time. The appointment letter has referred to the appointment as probationary for certain period and then it would be temporary. From the reading of the entire terms and conditions of thaw appointment I have no manner of doubt that the appointment of the petitioner was of temporary nature. It appears that the petitioner has not put in service for one year and his service has been terminated due to completion of the work in connection with which he was employed. That being the position, the petitioner is not entitled to any notice or any notice pay under section 19 of the Act. That is also a term in the appointment letter. .
5. The petitioner alleges in his grievance petition that he -was not paid minimum wages at Rs. 125 per month. If that be so he is entitled to wages at the rate of Rs. 125 p.m., from the date as provided in Minimum Wages Ordinance. The petition may also get wages for earned leave if any due. Besides these no other benefits seems to be available to the petitioner, in this case. I have, however, consider the opinions of the members.
6. ORDERED The petitioner do get wages till termination of his service at the rate of Rs. 125 per month as payable under the Minimum Wages Ordinance from the date as specified therein Minus the amount already received by the petitioner as salary. The petitioner be also paid wages for earned leave, if any due. 2nd party do comply with this order within one month from today.