' HAFIZ ABDUR REHMAN ANSARI (CHAIRMAN).--- All the above titled appeals are being decided by common judgment as common question of law and facts are involved in all these appeals.
2. The appellant-department has filed the instant appeals before this Court against judgment dated 14-2-2012 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur whereby Learned Presiding Officer, accepted the grievance petitions of the respondents/ grievance petitioners and ordered for regularization of service of the respondents/ grievance petitioners.
3. The brief facts of the instant appeals are that respondents/ petitioners have been working as sanitary workers in Municipal Committee/ TMA-Sadiqabad against permanent posts and vacant posts for the last 2/3 years, the respondents continuously to the entire satisfaction of the appellant-TMA Sadiqabad District Rahimyarkhan have been working without any break or gap.
Salary of the respondents/ grievance petitioners was paid without any deduction of weekly or other gazetted holidays. So the respondents/petitioners had attained the status of permanent worker/ workmen. The respondents/petitioners requested several times to Authority for regularization of their service but all in vain. They have not been regularized by the Authority malafidely despite repeated demands. The service Data of the respondents/petitioners is A given hereunder:--- Sr. No.Name of respondentDate of appointmentsDurations 1 Safdar Hussain 2-3-2010 2 years 2 Khadim Hussain 2-10-2009 3 Years 3 Zahid Hussain 1-12-2005 7 Years 4 Zaheer Ahmed 2-7-2009 3 Years 5 Asghar Ali 2-9-2009 3 Years 6 Moeen Ahmed 5-9-2005 7 years 7 Faiz Mehmood 2-10-2009 3 Years 8 Ghulam Abbas 1-9-2006 6 years 9 Mst. Zarina Bibi 28-4-2005 7 years 10 Ghulam Murtaza 1-6-1999 13 Years
4. Thereafter, respondents/grievance petitioners filed grievance petitions before Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur. After serving grievance notice upon TMA, Sadiqabad, the respondent/petitioner filed grievance petitions before Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur. It was alleged in the grievance petition that they are working for the last more than two years as sanitary worker in T.M.A-Sadiqabad. The respondents/petitioners were appointed against permanent posts; respondents/petitioners worked satisfactorily and honestly and their period of service were extended from time to time. The respondents/ petitioners possess unblemished career of service and respondents/ petitioners have attained the status of permanent workman. It was-alleged in the grievance petition that respondents/petitioners and others requested several time to T.M.O., Sadiqabad District Rahimyarkhan for regularization of service of the respondents/petitioners but all in vain.
Respondents/petitioners prayed for regularization of their service and claimed all the benefits of regular employee.
5. The T.M.A. Sadiqabad filed written statement and raised some preliminary objections that their recruitment was on daily wages purely on temporary basis. On facts, in the written statement all the facts were denied. All the respondents/petitioners appeared as P.W.-1 in their respective grievance petitions and supported their version as set out in the grievance petitions. Each of the respondents/petitioners has brought on the record a number of appointment letters from Exh.P.1 to Exh.P.10 and in some cases more than that, they have also brought on the record copies of grievance notices served upon the appellant-TMA along with postal receipts. On behalf of the TMA- respondents R.W.-1 Mehmood Ali Chief Officer TMA', Sadiqabad admitted that petitioners have been serving as sanitary workers with the TMA respondents from different dates and these dates are pertaining to different years definitely beyond a period of nine months. He further admitted that petitioners are regularly receiving salary and different letters were issued by the TMA, respondents from time to time whereby services of the respondents/ petitioners were extended. He further submitted that posts upon which the respondents/petitioners are working are not of permanent nature. Learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur accepted the grievance petitions vide judgment dated 14-2-2012 against which order instant appeals are filed by T.M.O., T.M.A, Sadiqabad before this Court.
6. Learned counsel for appellant-T.M.A Sadiqabad contended that respondents/petitioners were employed temporary on daily Wages basis as sanitary worker. The respondents/petitioners have no right for regularization of service. The respondents/petitioners were paid from contingency fund.
They were not appointed against regular vacant posts. Learned counsel further submitted that during service performance of the respondents were not good. Judgment passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur is illegal, perverse and arbitrary, same be set aside. Learned Presiding Officer did not apply his judicious mind to the facts of the case. Learned counsel further submitted that appellant-department has no budget for regularization of respondents/grievance petitioners.
7. Learned counsel for respondent submits that statement of R.W.1-Mahmood Ali that respondents/grievance petitioners are working with appellant-department for last more than 7/8 years. Learned counsel further submitted that respondents/petitioners recorded his statement and examination in chief respondents/grievance petitioners endorsed that they were appointed on permanent posts which is not cross examined by learned counsel for appellant-department in grievance petitions which amounts this part of statement remained un-question. Learned counsel for the respondents/grievance petitioners contended that although respondents/petitioners were appointed on Temporary Daily Wages basis but they attained the status of permanent workmen.
Learned counsel further submitted Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held in many judgments if temporary/Daily Wages basis workman against permanent project works for more than 90 days satisfactorily and his period of service was extended from time to time, he attains status of permanent workman. In the instant case the employees/respondents worked near about 2 years, secondly permanent workman is that who is employed or appointed against project which is not of temporary nature. Under West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders)
Ordinance, 1968, under 12(3) of the said Ordinance if project on which employee is appointed continues beyond 9 months, employee of such project appointed on daily wages attains the status of permanent workman. T.M.A. Sadiqabad is permanent institution which needs sanitary worker forever for the cleanliness of the City Sadiqabad District Rahimyarkhan. In all aspects respondents/petitioners have attained status of permanent workmen.
8. Learned counsel for respondents placed reliance on "PLD 1996 SC 610" titled as Executive Engineer, Central Civil Division, Pak P.W.D Quetta v. Abdul Aziz and others 1999 SCM R 2557, titled as lzhar Ahmed Khan and another v. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal Lahore and others.
9. I have heard the arguments of both the parties at length and perused the record minutely.
10. The respondents/petitioners were although appointed temporarily on Daily wages basis in T.M.A Sadiqabad District Rahimyarkhan as sanitary worker. They worked for more than 3/4 years which is not denied by appellant-T.M.A. Sadiqabad. In the judgment cited by learned counsel for respondent, it is held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan if employee on Daily Wages worked more than 90 days against permanent post, he attains the status of a permanent workman. In the light of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan respondents/ petitioners have attained the status of permanent workmen.
11: In PLD 1996 SC 610 titled as Executive Engineer, Central Civil Division, Pak P.W.D. Quetta v. Abdul Aziz and others. It is observed that if the nature of work for which a person is employed is of a permanent nature, then he becomes permanent upon expiry of the period of nine months mentioned in Sched., para. 1(b) of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders), Ordinance, 1968 provided he is covered by the definition of term "worker" as given in S.2(i) of the said Ordinance. If, however, the work is not of permanent nature and is not likely to last for more than nine months, then he is not covered by the said provisions.
12. In 1999 SCM R 2557 titled Izhar Ahmed Khan and others v. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal Lahore and others. It is observed that it work is of a permanent nature and likely to last for a period of more than nine months, workman employed on such a work, who successfully completes probationary period of three months, will be deemed to be a "permanent workman" But if nature of work is temporary and is likely to be finished within a period of nine months, then a workman employed on such work will be deemed to be a temporary workman.
13. It is admitted by R.W.-1 Mehmood Ali Chief Officer, TMA, Sadiqabad in cross-examination that petitioners/respondents have been serving as sanitary workers with the TMA, Sadiqabad from different dates and these, dates are pertaining to different years definitely beyond period of nine months. He further admitted that petitioners/respondents are regularly receiving salary and different letters were issued by the TMA, Sadiqabad from time to time whereby services of the petitioners/ respondents were extended. The Exh,P.1 to Exh.P.10 established/ substantiate that grievance petitioners have been working for more than nine months as Sanitary Worker. The whole statement of R.W.-1 Mehmood Ali Chief Officer supported the version of the grievance petitioners/ respondents.
14. The petitioners are working in TMA since 1999. The post against which respondents-employees are working are of a permanent nature, the institution where they are working is also permanent. In the light of judgments supra, the respondents/petitioners are entitled for regularization of the respondents/petitioners are entitled for regularization of their service, if there is any gap in their appointments that is artificial. R.W.-1 Mehmood Ali Chief Officer TMA, Sadiqabad replied in cross- examination which is reproduced below:-- {{URDU TEXT}}
15. In view of the above discussion, the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur rightly passed the judgment dated 14-2-2012 in which there is no flaw which is hereby upheld.
Appellant-T.M.A, Sadiqabad District Rahimyarkhan will regularize the service of the respondents- employees with immediate effect. The instant appeals have no legal force and same are dismissed as no order to costs.