1. This is a petition under section 25-A of the I. R. O., 1969, filed by Marroo Khan ex-Mason of Abbasi Textile Mills Limited, Rahimyar Khan, for his re-instatement by setting aside the order of retrenchment dated 29-10-75. It is stated in the petition that the posts of the mason still existed in the mills and to other persons are carrying out the work and therefore tae retrenchment of order was not bona fide. It was also maintained that the petitioner has not been paid his outstanding wages and that the respondent --mills did not take any action on the application of the petitioner for his un-employment submitted by him on 5-10-75. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent Management it was pleaded that the post of mason was reduced in order to decrease the expenditure of the mills, that the petitioner has himself avoided to receive his outstanding wages and that the application of the petitioner for re-employment was declined on account of the abolition of the post at which he worked.
2. The petition was filed in the former Junior Labour Court, Rahimyar Khan, and the evidence of the petitioner was recorded in that Court on 30-1-76 on which day all the Junior Labour Courts in Punjab had become defunct officio with effect from 16-i-76, under the Labour Laws (Amendment)
3. Ordinance, 1975, and the pending casts were transferred to the Labour Courts. The parties evidence has, therefore, been recorded in this Court and the arguments of the parties heard. The petitioner bas stated that after he was terminated new masons were recruited in the mills and they are working, that some new constructions have been built in the mills and that he can work as a 'Fitter' if recruited as fitter. Mr. Mubarik Hussain Siddiqui, R. W-1, stated on behalf of the respondent management that there were to posts of masons I n the works department of the mills which had been retrenched under an economy measure which action was taken an due course, and that the petty repair work of the mills which was formerly carried on by the masons is now being taken through the contractors in pursuance of the policy of the economy derive which has similarly been effected also in other departments of the mills. He further stated that the management has not replaced the retrenched masons by any other persons and that the management offered the petitioner a job of worker in the ginning factory owned by it but the petitioner refused to accept the job and insisted to be re-employed on his original job. In the cross examination he stated treat the number of spindles has been increased in the mills by 12 and half thousand during the year 1974-75 but the machinery was already in the stock of the mills sad was lying idle which was put into operation due to meet the losses. He also stated that the petitioner was a skilled worker and therefore the management was not bound to offer him the job of fitter pertaining to unskilled labour and that Akbar, Ahmed Bux and Manzoor have not been appointed as masons nor any body else was given any job of mason in the mills.
4. Mr. Noor-ullah, Accountant, R. W-2 sated in front of the Balance sheet for the year 1974-75 tendered in evidence by him as Exh. R-2 that the mills suffered a loss of Rs. 36,27,000 and that the balance- sheet has been duly audited by the auditors. In clue cross-examination he stated that he did not remember how much funds were allocated for the construction work for the year 197374 and whether these funds were decreased in regard to the year 1974-75. He further stated that the management has tiled the return to the Income-tax department on the basis of the aforesaid balance,-sheet and the case has not yet been finalized as to the verification of the losses shown by the mills in the balance-sheet.
5. A careful perusal of the parties evidence revealt that a comprehensive order was passed by the respondent management in regard to the retrenchment of the petitioner which is Exh. P-1. It has been indicated threin that the petitioner was retrenched due to abolition of the post of mason under the requirement of the organization. He was also called upon in the same order to collect his dues from the accounts department. The respondent has also tendered in evidence an office order of the Mills Management Exh. R-1 according to which in view of the re-organisation under economy measure some reshufling and retrenchment in the strength of the employees was necessitated and a number of posts in different departments of the mills including to posts of masons were abolished under the signatures of the General Manager of the mills with effect from 29-10-75. In this case the action taken by the management fulfils the purpose of Standing Order 12 (3) of the West Pakistan Industrial & Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, which places an obligation on the management to show an explicit reason for the retrenchment of the workers. The management indicated in the retrenchment order that the post of the petitioner has been retrenched under the requirements of the re-organization which fact was further proved by the office order Exh. R-1 which shows that official consideration was given to the retrenchment of the staff and it was finally decided in due course. Moreover, it is quire pertinent to note that no person could be proved to have been appointed in place of the petitioner at the job of Mason or at some other job under different name for carrying out the functions alloted to the job of mason. In this background of the evidence the order of retrenchment cannot be excepted in regard to its bona fides. I am fortified in my view by the recent judgment given in Appeal No. RYK-110/76/PB in Muhammad Aslam v. Abbasi Textile Mills Limited by the learned Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal decided on 27-7-76 in which it was held that when action of the factory regarding the retrenched employee was found to be bona fide it did not attract the control of the Industrial Court. The esteemed judgment also referred to Supreme Court authoritiy in this behalf Re : Zeal Pak Cement Factory Limited, Hyderabad v. Chairman, West Pakistan Industrial Court (PLD 1965 SC 430). The petition is therefore dismissed. The file may be consigned.