DECISION Heard Mr. Siddique Mirza for the appellants.
These are connected appeals by Pakistan Steel Mills against the order of reinstatement of its employees by allowing their petition under section 25-A of the I.R.O.
2. The facts in brief are that the respondents were employed in the appellant Steel Mills in various categories.
3. Rasheed Khan was appointed Junior Assistant from 1-9-1975. Maroof Ahmed was also employed as Assistant from 16-6-1979 and lastly Khursheed Alam was appointed as Labour Assistant for testing the various materials used in the Steel Mills.
4. Rasheed Khan has alleged that his work was of clerical/manual nature and he was a workman.
He was doing filing work and typing work as a clerk. His services were terminated illegally and he, therefore, filed his grievance petition.
5. Respondent Maroof Ahmed has also claimed that he was member of the trade union and he was doing clerical job preparing leave advices, doing filing work and maintaining Earned Leave.
Medical Leave and Casual Leave record. That his services were terminated illegally and he, therefore, filed his grievance petition.
6. Respondent Khursheed Alam was working as a Labour Assistant testing the chemicals used in the Steel Mills. He was charge-sheeted and dismissed from service.
7. It is the case of the appellant Steel Mills that all these employees were executive officials doing managerial work and were not workmen.
8. It is true that initially the burden is on the workmen to show that they are workmen under the I.R.O. And the Standing Orders Ordinance and their claim then has to be rebutted by the employer, by such evidence as job description and nature of duties entrusted to them as supervisory or managerial, but in these cases no such evidence has been produced. The learned Labour Court accordingly found that these respondents were workmen within the purview of the Standing Orders Ordinance and the I.R.O. That their services were terminated by simply stating that they are no longer required. That under the Standing Orders Ordinance section 12(3) explicit reasons for the termination are to be given. He accordingly found that termination to be illegal.
9. The orders of the Labour Court in respect of these three workers, therefore, appear to be reasonable and proper and these appeals are accordingly dismissed in limine.