AWARD The General Secretary 'of the Field Workers' Union of Agriculture Department, Lyallpur, raised an industrial dispute by giving a notice of demand to the officer of the Department. The conciliation proceedings failed on 31-3-1975 and so the Union filed a petition in the Court under section 32 (1-A) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, for adjudication.
2. The respondent in the case are Extra Assistant ' Director of Agriculture, Lyallpur. Deputy Directors of Agriculture (Extension), Sargodha Division, Sargodha and the Director General of Agriculture (Extension), Punjab Government, Lahore. The first two respondents filed written replies and resisted the petitioner. The third respondent did not cate to contest the petition, hence ex parte proceedings were taken against him.
3. A preliminary objection was raised to the effect that the petition was not maintainable under the law because section 1 (3) of the Ordinance excluded the persons, employed in the administration of the State. The objection has no force. The question was set at rest by my learned predecessor on 7-6-73 in his judgment, the copy of which is Exh. P. D. on record. in this case the petitioner-Union applied for registration to the Registrar of Trade Unions, Sargodha Region, Lyallpur. Its application was rejected on the ground that the Members of the Union were Government servants and so the Trade Union could not be registered. Consequently, the petitioner. Union filed an appeal, My learned predecessor relying 1972 PLC 288 hold that the field workers of the Agriculture Department were workers within the meaning of the Ordinance and so the Registrar o Trade Unions was directed to register the Union. This finding is binding o the respondents. As the Members of the Union were workers within provisions of the Ordinance, therefore, an industrial dispute can be raised by them, the objection is overruled.
Demand No. 1.-1. Class IV Employees, namely Balldars, Malley, etc. who were made regular from 1-7- 72 and 1-7-7.3 should be paid gratuity equivalent to twenty days wages for every complete year of service.
The dispute relates to contingent paid staff, employed by the Agriculture Department at Lyallpur.
They were Class IV employees and no gratuity provident fund or pension benefits accrued to them.
The Government of People's Party came into power in 1911 and brought radical change to improve conditions of service of Labour class. As far as Government servants are concerned a scheme of National Pay Scale was introduced. Later on almost all the contingent paid staff was made regular.
In this connection, Government of Punjab. Agriculture Department issued a letter on 30-8-73 to the Director---General (Extension), Punjab Lahore and the Director-General (Research) Lyallpur for regularisation the service of contingent paid staff. The letter is couched in the following words:- "The Government of the Punjab, Agriculture Department in consultation with the Finance Department is pleased to accord sanction to the regularisation of the contingent paid staff detailed in the list attached. Necessary re-appropriation for bringing contingent staff on a regular footing from the prescribed dates may be issued immediately."
4. The copy of this letter is Exh. P. F. on record. The list attached to this letter shows that about 696 employees were made regular. Approximately, half of them were made regular on 1-7-72, whereas the remaining half were made regular on 1-7-73. The list includes Malies, Sweepers Chowkidars, Watchman, Baildars, Coolies, Jeep Drivers, Tube-well Operators, Fieldman, Store attendants and Cleaners of the office of Director. Rapid Soil Fertility and Director Plant Protection Institute, Lyallpur and Director Punjab, Agricul--ture Research Institute, Lyallpur.
5. After they were made regular a question for grant of gratuity to the contingent paid/works- charges employees brought on a regular footing arose before the Government. The decision of the Government was conveyed in its letter dated 9-9-1974 (Exh. D. A.) and is as under:- "I am directed to state that after being brought of a regular footing some of the work-charged and contingency paid staff will retire before rendering such services as would qualify for pension or gratuity under the existing pension Rules. As a large number of them have put in considerable service and are nearing retirement, it has been decided that a gratuity at 20 days pay for each complete year of service may be given to them on the basis of- monthly pay drawn by them. The gratuity will be paid for the period of service after being brought on a regular footing and will be calculated on the basis of the pay drawn in the last month before retirement.
I am to add that that facility would be admissible only to these who do not qualify for pension/gratuity under rule 4.6 of the West Pakistan Civil Services Pension Rules."
6. The present position is that gratuity is payable to the employees from the date on which they were brought on regular footing and all those Per on would be included in these rules who do not qualify for pension, gratuity under rule 4.6 under the West Pakistan Civil Servants Rules of 1960. In these circumstances, the petitioner-Union has raised a demand to the effect that gratuity should be paid to the contingent paid/works-charge employees for the service, rendered by them before being brought on a regular footing.
7. All the Government servants are allowed the benefit of either pension or gratuity but the contingent paid/work-charge staff was excluded from these benefits. They were neither allowed the pension nor gratuity and they were not even allowed to subscribe to the Provident Fund. The workers of almost all the big establishments were allowed the benefits of gratuity even before independence. Usually the industrial establishments introduced a scheme of course with certain limitations to entitle the workers to get gratuity at the time of termination of service. Finally, the right of the workers was recognized by the Legislature and in sub-pare. 6 of Standing Order No. 12 of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 the following provisions were made about gratuity for the benefit of the workers:- "Where a workman resigns from service or his services are terminated by the employer, for any reason other than misconduct, he shall, in addition to any other benefit to which he may be entitled under this Ordinance or in accordance with the terms of his employment or, any custom, usage or any settlement or an award of a Labour Court under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (XXIII of 1969) be paid gratuity equivalent to twenty days wages, calculated on the basis of the wages admissible to him in the last month of service if he is a fixed-rated workman or the highest pay drawn by him during the last twelve months if he is a piece-rated workman, for every completed year of service or any part thereof in excess of six months: Provided that, where the employer has established a provident fund to which the workman is a contributor the contribution of the employer to which is not less than the contribution made by the workman, no such gratuity, shall be payable for the period during which such provident fund has been in existence."
8. Receiving gratuity at the time of termination of service is a guaranteed right for the workers of industrial establishment or commercial establishment. Except for misconduct, gratuity is payable to a workman in all other circumstances. The difficulty in this case is that the Standing Orders Ordinance is not applicable because all the establishments carried on by or under the Authority of the Federal or Provincial Government are excluded and their employees are governed by their statutory rules.
9. It is now well-settled that the gratuity is reward for good efficiency of a faithful service, rendered for a fairly substantial period and it is not paid to the employees gratuitously or merely as a matter of boon but for long and meritorious service. The previous Government did not care to visualize the plight of the low-paid contingent or work-charge staff. On one hand they had no security of service and on the other hand they were not allowed any benefits either of gratuity or pension or provident fund. After all, the contingent paid or work-charge staff had been putting along service like all those Government servants who were in the higher grades. It appears great injustice to them that in the old age when they are not fit to work no provision for their subsistence should be made by the Government. In prin--ciple, the Government in its letter dated 9-9-74 (copy Exh. A. D.) has agreed that gratuity should be paid to them but they have calculated the gratuity from the date when they were made regular. In this way their previous service has not been accounted for. I am of the considered view that all such employees who have rendered any service prior to their being brought on regular footing be paid gratuity till the date they were made regular and from onward the policy laid down in the letter dated 9-9-74 shall apply to them. It means that a gratuity at the rate of twenty days pay for each completed year of service shall be paid to them, calculated on the basis of wages admissible to them in the last month of service preceding his retirement. The demand is accepted in the above terms.
Demand No. 2.-Compensation should be given to the workers who died during sprinkling poisonous insecticide. It is a guaranteed right under Workman Compensation Act, 1923 and so no industrial dispute can be raised.
Demand. No. 3.-Rapers of Leather Gloves should be supplied to the workers while handling poisonous drugs. This demand was withdrawn. So it is rejected.
Demand. No. 4.-Beldar Ghulam Nabi son of Ameer Bux, Chak No. 36 J B, died due to poisonous effect of insecticide. He should be paid compensation.
Again it is a guaranteed right and so no industrial dispute can be raised. The demand is rejected. 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.