DECISION ' The appellant who was working as an Assistant Manager Incharge of a Section responsible to the Director Finance when his services were terminated on 25th June, 1990. At that time he was drawing a salary of Rs,11,000 per month. The appellant preferred a grievance petition before Labour Court No, 5, Karachi the grounds being that he was a worker and the termination order did not mention explicit reasons for the termination. The learned Labour Court found that the appellant was doing the duty which was supervisory and managerial in nature. He, therefore, dismissed the petition as being not maintainable. The appellant then preferred an appeal against this order before the Tribunal. My learned predecessor Mr. Agha All Hyder, J. Found that the Labour Court had disposed of the whole petition by determining only one issue whether the appellant was a worker.
He, therefore, remanded the case for decision on all the issues. Even against this order the respondent filed a Constitution petition in High Court. The High Court also adopted the same view that the decision should be on merits regarding the whole case and the case was remanded to the Tribunal for decision.
2. I have heard Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Khan, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Abdul Hafiz, Advocate on behalf of the Pharmaceutical Company.
3. The facts of this case are more or less admitted regarding the broad aspect concerning this matter. The appellant was Assistant Manager and he enjoyed the status next to the Manager. He was Incharge of the Section and he initiated A.C.Rs, of the workers. He granted them leave in that section and allowed overtime. If he was signing the cheques or doing such other work of clerical nature that work was incidental to his main duties of supervisory nature and by doing such type of clerical work which was not the substantial or the main part of his work it cannot be said that he became a clerk or a manual worker. The Pharmaceutical Company of M/s. Reckitt & Colman of Pakistan Limited is a fairly large Company and Assistant Manager of that company during the work of managerial nature cannot be regarded to be a manual worker or a clerk as defined under section 2(i) of the West Pakistan Standing Orders Ordinance. As such the petition of the Assistant Manager before the Labour Court would not lie. He could have recourse to civil remedies under the contract. The next issue that no explicit reasons were given in the order of termination becomes of merely academic importance as the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to decide this issue. The decision of the Labour Court is accordingly maintained and the appeal is dismissed.