1. MD. NURUL ISLAM KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-This is an application under section 25(1) (b) of the East Pakistan Employment of Labour (Standing Orders) Act, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the Act,- made by Md. Ali Azam, Clerk, against the Chairman, East Pakistan Co-operative Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd., with prayer for directing re-instatement to his former post with all back wages, The case of the first party is that he had been serving under the second party for about last 16 years with good reputation; He was drawing Rs. 163.00 per month. On 8-11-69 the second party issued a termination order stating that due to bad financial position of the Mill he could no longer be kept in the services and the services of the first party were terminated from 15-11-69. He sent a grievance petition under regis--tered cover on, 18-1i-69. The second ought to have observed the procedure of retrenchment but these have not been done. The complainant is a senior-most member of the staff and when his services were terminated the junior members still remained in employment. The complainant was a monthly rated, permanent worker and he was legally entitled to 224 days' compensation, 30 days' earned leave, 90 days' notice pay 15 days' unpaid salary for the month of November 1969, provident fund money and other legal dues. But the second party did not pay him anything. The order of termination has been passed whimsically and legally.
2. In the present case the second party did not enter into appearance and as such, the case of the second party is, not known. The china of the first party appears to have been proved in view of the act that he had a long 1.6 years of service, but his services were terminated on the ground of bad financial condi--tion of the second party. It has been alleged by the first party that the rules and procedure of retrenchment in such a case would not apply and through he was a senior-most employee of his category--- he was retrenched first keeping the junior-most in service, This procedure is illegal: Further, he was entitled to receive the benefits as has claimed in case of a termination. It appear in the present case that though the second party has raised a plea of bad financial condition, in fact, they have terminated his services by the impugned order and as such in case of a termination simpliciter he is entitled to all the benefits he has sought for in this case.
3. Hence- the application is allowed ex parte and it [s decided that the second party be directed to give the first party all the legal benefits he has claimed in the application. The second party is accordingly directed to ex-pay the following termination benefits to tile first party
(1) 90 days' notice pay in lieu of notice.
(2) Compensation at the rate of 14 days' wages for every completed year of service or for any part thereof in excess of six months.
(3) Unavailed of annual leave salary.
(4) Unpaid earned wages, if any.
(5) Provident fund amount and other legal dues, if any.
4. The second party is accordingly directed to calculate and deposit the amount in Court to the credit of the first party within thirty days from the date of passing this order.
5. Members on consultation agree with my above decision.