Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1995 PLC 723

AZIZUR REHMAN vs M/s. PAK CHEMICAL LIMITED, KARACHI

Citation1995 PLC 723
CourtLabour Appellate Tribunal
Case No.Appeal No, KAR-242 of 1992
Date1995-05-15
Judge(s)Mushtaq Ali Kazi
ResultAppeal allowed

DECISION ' This appeal arises from an order of the Third Sindh Labour Court, Karachi whereby the grievance petition of the appellant worker for reinstatement was rejected by the Labour Court.

2. The facts are that the appellant was appointed on 11-8-1990 as Badli worker on the post of a permanent helper. His services were terminated on 14-1-1991. He was thus continuously employed for a period of more than 3 months and he became a permanent worker. His services were terminated under Standing Order 12(3) by an order in writing, reason being that the permanent helper in whose place he had been employed had returned from leave and rejoined.

3. The appellant has admittedly worked as Badli worker for a period of 4 months. An objection had been raised that he had remained absent for about 5 days on two occasions but a short absence for any reason does not break the continuity of service. He therefore became a permanent worker by the end of 3 months.

4. The next objection is that the services of the appellant were terminated under section 12(3) by an order in writing giving reasons. However, section 12(1) applicable in case of permanent worker has not been complied with and the appellant was neither given any notice nor offered pay in lieu of notice.

5. It has then been argued that the grievance notice was not signed by the appellant himself but somebody else wrote the name of the appellant on his behalf, since the appellant was illiterate and he usually applied his thumb-mark. However, the notice signed by somebody on behalf of the appellant would still be a notice sent by the appellant and this objection is without substance. This notice can be considered to have been signed by the appellant himself under section 25-A. The appellant being illiterate his name was written by the scribe who wrote the notice.

6. The termination of service of the appellant was not therefore in accordance with section 12(1) of the Standing Order, since no dues in lieu of notice have been paid to him. The appellant is therefore directed to be reinstated in service within 30 days. The order of the lower Court is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch