DECISION These appeals by the Steel Mills are directed against the order of Fourth Sind Labour Court, Karachi allowing the grievance petition of respondent worker Arshad Ahmed and reinstating him in service with full a back benefits.
2. The respondent was engaged as a Mason with effect from 1988 on daily wages of Rs.55. He was to work at Gujju Canal Pumping Station for supplying water to the Steel Mills. This work was of permanent nature but the Steel Mills kept terminating the appointment of the respondent from the to the and then reinstating him in service so as to avoid his becoming a permanent worker. In this manner the respondent worked till 28-9-1991 when he was issued a termination order which reads as under:-- The temporary job for which you were appointed on daily wages basis has been completed.
Your services are therefore terminated with effect from the close of work on 29-9-1991.
You are hereby advised to collect your full and final settlement dues if any from our department as soon as possible.
3. The very wording of the termination order shows that the respondent worked continuously from date of appointment till termination as a temporary worker. The mode of payment of wages is immaterial. On the date of the termination he was advised to collect his dues in full and final settlement.
4. It has been admitted in evidence that Gujju Canal work is of permanent nature and about 200 workers are permanently engaged for maintenance of the Canal. This has been admitted by Amjad Ali Abdi, Assistant Manager, Pakistan Steel. He has also admitted that the respondent was getting pay on the voucher and Attendance Register containing his name was maintained and he has worked uptill 16-10-1991. When permanent staff was required to maintain Canal and the work of the respondent continued from 1988 it cannot suddenly be stated that the work had been completed. Likewise the services of respondent Jalil were also continued from 1988 to 1991 for 3 or 4 years and he was given a similar termination order as work was completed but the Canal remains and the work of Chowkidar continues. Thus, both the Mason and the Chowkidar have completed their probationary period of three months and they were engaged on work "of permanent nature likely to last more than nine months. They have, therefore, assumed the character of permanent workmen the mode of payment being of no consequence. Their work of permanent nature cannot be said to have been P come. Thus, the respondents' services have been terminated in violation of Order 12 of the Standing Orders Ordinance. No notice had been given to them nor have explicit reasons for their termination been mentioned in the termination order.
5. Under the circumstance, I can find no ground for interference with the orders of the Labour Court in respect of both the respondents. These orders are, therefore, maintained and the appeals are dismissed.