DECISION ' These are two connected appeals arising from orders of the 1st Sindh Labour Court, Karachi whereby their grievance petitions for re-instatement were rejected.
2. The appellants were working as operators in the Wire Knitting Machine of the respondent manufacturing Hard Boards. As a result of reorganization the respondent Hard Board Industries closed down the Wire Knitting Machine since they could get cheaper Wire nets in the market. The respondent accordingly terminated the services of the appellant in writing giving the reasons for the retrenchment.
3. The appellants have not alleged that the termination was illegal or mala fide. They have however stated that their case of retrenchment is in contravention of Order 13 of the Standing Orders Ordinance as they were the senior most workers` with 18 years service and they had entered into service in the lowest grade as coolies. They could therefore have been retained on reversion to the lower grade of coolies instead of being terminated.
' Subject to the final outcome and the legal remedies available to us against the impugned order dated 7-3-1993, you are re-instated in service with effect from 7-3-1993.
' However, we regret to inform you that the job (Installation of EMD Exchages) for which you used to be engaged against temporary nature of work from time to time being not available, your services are therefore hereby terminated with immediate effect on payment of one month's wages in lieu of notice.
' Yours faithfully, (Sd.) Manager, Planning and ' Installation Tip, KTR, Karachi.
2. This order in the form of a letter, shows that the Telephone Industries communicated to each of these workers that they were not pleased with the order of reinstatement by the Labour Court. They however conditionally reinstated workers but at the same time by another stroke of pen informed the workers that their services after reinstatement were again terminated with immediate effect on payment of one month's wages in lieu of notice as the job of installation of exchanges was no longer available.
3. The workers accordingly preferred their grievance petitions before the Sindh Labour Court No, V, Karachi. The learned Labour Court came to the conclusion that "the applicants had already been declared to be permanent workmen and that they were appointed as technicians and not for any particular job or any particular system; that their work still existed. Their services were not therefore legally terminated." The learned Labour Court accordingly ordered all the applicant workers to be reinstated in service with full back benefits within 15 days. Against this order the Telephone Industries have preferred this appeal.
4. The contention of the learned Advocate for the appellant is that the services of the workman were terminated under section 13 of the Standing Orders on account of retrenchment, it has on the other hand been pointed out by Mr. A.M. Jeelani for the workmen that the Telephone Company even after the order of termination has appointed new workers in the same category. By way of illustration two letters of appointment dated 20-1-1986 have been exhibited, in respect of appointment of one Nayyar Iqbal in the post of Installation Mechanic-I, and another letter for appointment of Shamim Akhtar. This clearly shows that the requirements of Standing Order 13 of the Standing Orders were not complied with and the last persons employed in the category had not been retrenched under Standing Order 13. The every order of reinstatement and termination reproduced above would show that the Telephone Company had scant regard for the order of the Labour Court, which was a final order, and the language used in the body of the letter is clearly in the nature of contempt of the lawful orders passed by the Labour Court. The Telephone Company openly disobeyed the direction of the Labour Court by A re-instatement and retrenchment order passed in the same breath. The order of the Labour Court is accordingly maintained and the appeal of the Telephone Industries is dismissed.