DECISION ' This appeal is directed against the decision of the learned Vth Labour Court, given on 25th November, 1981, allowing the grievance petition of the respondent and directing his re-instatement in service with back benefits.
2. The facts which have led to the filing of this appeal, shortly stated, are that the respondent was appointed as Junior Supervisor in the then National Construction Co. (Pakistan) Ltd. w,e,f, 16th February, 1974 and was confirmed in the said post with effect from 15th May, 1974, vide letter of the N.C.C. (Pakistan) Ltd., dated 21st May, 1974. He continued to serve in the said company in different projects and in different capacities up to 29th December, 1979, when he was informed by a letter of even date, issued by the National Construction Ltd., that he had become surplus of their requirements and accordingly his services were being terminated with effect from that date. At this stage it becomes necessary to explain how the National Construction Ltd. Issued this letter when the respondent originally was the employee of the N.C.C. (Pakistan) Ltd. Mr. Naeem Bukhari, the learned counsel for the appellant, has placed before me various documents indicating how this change took place. The first document is a letter, dated 28th January, 1978, from the Deputy Secretary, Works Division, Government of Pakistan, advising that with the approval of the C.M.L.A. It had been decided to re-organise the N.C.C. (Pakistan) Ltd; and that there should be two new companies namely, N. C. C. (domestic operations) and N. C. C. (Overseas operations), besides the original N.C.C. In consequence of the above directive it appears that meetings of the Board of Directors of the N.C.C. And of the subscribers/members of the company took place on 26th April, 1978 wherein it was formally decided that new company, to be known as National Construction Ltd; would be formed to take over projects in Pakistan of the old N.C.C. (Pakistan) Ltd. And the persons employed on such projects while another company, to be known as N.C.C. (Pakistan) Ltd; would be formed to take over the projects of the old N.C.C. Out. Side Pakistan and the persons employed therein. There was also to be a holding or a parent company, to be known as National Construction Company (Holding) Ltd. Accordingly, the National Construction Ltd; was registered under the Companies Act and its Memorandum and Articles of Association were filed with the Registrar of Companies in 1978. There are two more documents which are important in this behalf. The first is a letter, dated 9th April, 1978, from the Ministry of Housing, Works and Urban Development, appointing Brig. Wasif Hussain as Managing Director of the National Construction Company Ltd; the company entrusted with the domestic operations. The second is a circular issued by Brig. Wasif Hussain in his capacity as Managing Director of the N. C. Ltd. Directing the said company to look after all domestic operations of the old N. C. (Pakistan) Ltd; and that all employees' liabilities and assignments pertaining to the domestic construction commitments shall stand transferred to the newly formed National Construction Ltd; with effect from 1st July, 1978. It will be seen from the above narration of facts that by reason of these changes the employees of the N.C.C. (Pakistan) Ltd; who were engaged in domestic projects, stood transferred to the newly formed National Construction Ltd. With effect from 1st July, .1979. It was in these circumstances that this company had terminated the services of the respondent vide its letter, dated 29th December, 1979.
3. Aggrieved by the above termination of his services the respondent filed a grievance petition before the learned Labour Court on 12th February, 1980. During the, pendency of the proceedings on the grievance petition, the respondent received a sum of Rs, 7,563.76 from the appellant company and signed a final settlement voucher on 13th November, 1980. Furthermore, after collecting his above dues, the respondent signed a foreign service agreement with the other newly formed company namely, National Construction Co. (Pakistan) Ltd. And took up an assignment in Libya in that company. According to that agreement his expected date of departure from Pakistan was 24th November, 1980 and the date on which the agreement was to expire was 20th June, 1985. It is, however, claimed by Mr. Yousuf Khan that the services of the respondent in the foreign project have been terminated with effect from 24th December, 1981.
4. I have heard Mr. Mem Bukhari, the learned counsel for the appellant company, and Mr. Yousuf Khan, who appeared for the respondent workmen.
5. In this appeal we are not concerned with the termination of services of the respondent in the foreign project and Mr. Yousuf Khan expressly stated that the grievance petition of the appellant is not against the termination of his employment in that project. The sole ground on which Mr. Naeem Bukhari assailed the impugned decision of the learned Labour Court was that the respondent having received his full dues in final settlement and also having accepted the appointment in another company, he was no longer an aggrieved person and consequently his grievance petition was no longer maintainable. In support of his contention Mr. Naeem Bukhari relied upon the decisions reported as Mirza Majeed 8aig v. Fatehally Chemicals (l), Abdul Aziz v. Rahwali Sugar Mills
(2) and Muhammad Siddique v. Premier Tobacco Company (3). In the case of Mirza Majeed Baig it was found by a Division Bench of the High Court that the workman against whom an order was passed by the Industrial Tribunal granting permission to the employer to dismiss the workman, that before going to the High Court in writ jurisdiction, they had acquiesced with the order of the Industrial Tribunal by receiving all their dues, including notice pay, provident fund, gratuity etc; it was held by the High Court that by having received the above payment, the workers have ceased to be an aggrieved party. The High Court accordingly dismissed the constitutional petition filed by the workmen. In the case of Abdul Aziz, it was held by the Labour appellate Tribunal, Punjab, that the workman having received all the dues in full and final settlement unconditionally during the pendency of the appeal he has ceased to be an aggrieved party and accordingly the Appellate Tribunal was no longer empowered to adjudicate upon the grievance which was already settled. In the case of Muhammad Siddique, it was held by this Tribunal, relying on the decision in the case of Fatehally Chemicals that the workman who has collected his dues in full and final settlement of his claim in compliance with the directions made in the order of his dismissal was no longer an aggrieved person and hence his grievance petition was not maintainable. In the instant case, the admitted position is that the respondent, on 30th November, 1980, had received a sum of Rs, 7,563.76 from the appellant company in final settlement of his claim as appears from the bank vouchers which is at page 161 of the record of the learned Labour Court. This amount included the pay of the respondent from 1st December, 1979 to 29th December, 1979, notice pay of one month, leave encashment for twenty-one days, arrears for Dearness Allowance and full provident fund amount. These payments clearly demonstrate the fact that not only the respondent was finally serving his confections with the appellant Company but was fully setting his account/ claim against it. Furthermore, as stated, the respondent thereafter took up foreign assignment in other company though the said company admittedly a sister-concern of the appellant Company.
Having collected his dues in full and final settlement, the respondent could not thereafter be considered as an aggrieved person and hence his grievance petition was clearly; not maintainable.
6. It was sought to be argued by Mr. Yousuf Khan, the learned counsel for the respondent, that the circumstances in which the respondent {{FOOT NOTE}}
(1) 1973 PLC 297 (2) 1980 PLC 664
(3) 1981 PLC 670 {{FOOT NOTE}} ' had accepted the payment have to be considered. He submitted that inasmuch as the respondent had accepted the payment after filing his grievance petition, he should not be deemed to have given up his claim to arrears. I find no fore in this contention. Having signed a final settlement document and accepted an assignment in another company through the good offices of the appellant Company, the respondent should be deemed to have given up all his claims against the appellant-Company. Mr. Yousuf Khan also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of National Construction Company, Karachi v. S. Waliur Rehman. That decision is of no assistance to the respondent as the position in that case was that the workman was undoubtedly an employee of the old National Construction Co. (Pakistan) Ltd. And while that united company was in existence the workman was sent abroad on foreign assignment by the company.
7. For the reasons discussed by me above, I would set aside the decision of the learned Labour Court and allow the appeal. The amount deposited by the appellant Company is refunded to it.