Pakistan Case Law← Search
1992 PLC 1202

AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL UNDERWATERS PAKISTAN (PRIVATE) LIMITED

Citation1992 PLC 1202
CourtLabour Appellate Tribunal
Case No.Application No, KAR-301 of 1991
Date1992-02-02
Judge(s)Agha Ali Hyder
ResultReference answered

DECISION ' It appears that the applicants had presented a 'Charter of Demands' to the respondents which had resulted in a settlement between the parties on 15th July, 1990.

2. Later a controversy had ensued about the implementation of clause (2) thereof between the parties. It pertains to the salaries. The Union had sent a letter on 19-2-1991 complaining that the increments which had fallen due to the workers from the Financial Year commencing from July, 1991 had been wrongfully denied to them and they should be reimbursed. The alleged breach was denied in the letter from the employee. The Union has, therefore, came to this Tribunal for the interpretation of clause (2) of the settlement earlier arrived between the parties which reads as under:- "2. Salaries

(a) It is agreed that the Basic Salaries of the workmen would be raised by 17-1/2 % with effect from 1st June, 1990, due to the increase in cost of .Living.

(b) The minimum annual grade increments effective from 1st July, 1990, shall be as follows:- {{TABLE}} Higher Grades Rs,195 Supervisors Rs,150 Assistants Rs,115 Typists/Clerks ............................. Rs,95 Drivers/Beakers .......................... Rs,70 Peons Rs,60" {{TABLE}}

3. I have heard Mr. Abdul Majeed for the applicants and Mr. A. Hafiz for the respondents.

4. Sub-clause (a) read by itself would approximate with the contention of Mr. Abdul Majeed.

However it has to be read in juxtaposition with sub-clause (b).

5. Read together it would go to show that the increment of the employees due on the 1st of July and the 17-1/2 % increase allowed, had been duly computed and the amounts of Rs,195, 150, 115, 95, 70 and 60 respectively for the different grades included both the increments due on 1-7-1991 and the increase.

6. It is an admitted position of law that no fresh evidence can be led, or other documents examined, apart from the text of the settlement whose terms are the subject-matter of interpretation.

7. Judged thus, the construction being placed by the employers is the correct one. Answer accordingly.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search