DECISION ' The dispute between the parties unfortunately has a chequered history.
2. The appellant states to have been working as Accountant with the Urdu Academy Sindh since 1955. It appears that he was removed from service sometime in 1986 and he had preferred an application before the Labour Court against the said order of removal. The application came to be dismissed and an appeal was preferred which was allowed. The respondents filed a writ petition before the High Court of Sindh which was dismissed and Leave to Appeal was granted by the Supreme Court. However, in this order the back benefits were not to be paid till the final decision.
3. The respondents in consequence had reinstated the appellant but kept him idle. He was, however, retired on 30-10-1989 on the ground that he had attained the age of superannuation. This led to a petition filed before the Labour Court.
4. The appellant was the sole witness on his behalf and in spite of the fact that his allegation was that the Academy had more than 20 workers no particulars could be furnished not to say substantiated. There was no support forthcoming from any quarters whatsoever. On the other hand, it appears that Babul Islam Printing Press and Urdu Academy are separately registered under the Shops and Establishments Ordinance, 1969.
5. It was held in Abdul Razzaq v. Messrs lhsan Sons Limited and 2 others in. Civil Appeal No, 351-K of 1986; that the Head Office and the Factory should be treated as separate establishments. It has been duly proved that the number of the workers in the Urdu Academy is below than 20. Under the circumstances, the provisions of Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 are not attracted. In that case the petition was properly dismissed by the Labour Court.
6. The learned Presiding Officer has also considered that under the Shops and Establishments Ordinance, 1969, there could be no retirement unless there was an agreement or settlement as to the age of retirement, but, that need not tarry us, as it does not come within the scope of section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine.