DECISION ' Muhainmad Ashraf was employed as a Conductor in the respondent's Corporation with effect from 5-5-1991. On 6-5-1992 after about one year his services were orally terminated w,ithout any order in writing. After service of grievance notice he filed a petition before the Labour Court under section 25-A of the I.R.O. The learned Labour Court found that the appellant was a badli worker on daily wages of Rs,40 per day and he had therefore no legal rights to be secured under section 25-A of the I.R.O. His application was accordingly dismissed.
2. Mr. Latif Saghar on behalf of the appellant has rightly pointed out that under section 12(3) of the Standing Orders Ordinance the word workman has not been qualified by any adjective like permanent, temporary, probationer or Badli. Subsection (3) of Standing Order 12 applies to any type of worker including worker on daily wages. The only requirement being that termination should be by an order in writing explicitly stating the reasons for the action taken. In this case it is admitted that no order in writing was given to the appellant nor were any reasons stated.
3. Under the circumstances the termination was in violation of the Standing Orders Ordinance and the oral termination order cannot therefore be A sustained. The appellant may accordingly be reinstated in service as conductor within 15 days with all the back benefits. Appeal is allowed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.