1. ' Petitioners by this petition impugned order dated 8-2-1996 passed by the IVth Sindh Labour Court at Karachi dismissing the Application of the Petitioners and Order dated 13-5-1996 dismissing the Appeal filed before the Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal. (hereinafter referred to as 'SLAT') at Karachi.
2. ' Brief facts for the purpose of disposing of the Petition are that the Petitioners were the permanent employees of the Respondent No,1 Establishment and on 15-8-1986 Respondent No,1 Charge- sheeted the Petitioners due to their unlawful trade activities and after holding an ex- parte inquiry dismissed them from service on 2-10-1985. The Petitioner after serving grievance notice tiled grievance Petition before Labour Court who allowed the Petition on 11-8-1987 and directed the Respondent No,1 to pass fresh order after giving personal hearing to Petitioners. Against the said order, Petitioner preferred appeal which was dismissed in limine. The Petitioners preferred Constitution Petition No,D-692 of 1987 and this Court allowed the Petition and remanded the case to Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the parties. The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Order passed by the Labour Court vide his order dated 19th November, 1995 and remanded the case for fresh trial de novo to Labour Court. After remand of the matter to Labour Court the Petitioners did not produce any further evidence and requested that the case may be decided on the basis of available evidence on record. The learned Labour Court by his order dated 8-2-1996 dismissed the grievance Petition on the ground that the Petitioners were dismissed from the service on 15-8-1987 in terms of Order dated 11-8-1987 and further that the Petitioners have received their all dues after passing of the dismissal order and that there exist no relationship between the parties after the date of their dismissal. The Petitioners filed Appeal against the said Order which too was dismissed on 13-5-1996.
3. ' Heard Mr. Raja Shamsuzaman, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. Mahmood Abdul Ghani, learned Advocate for Respondent No,1, ' The learned Advocate for the Petitioners mainly argued that both the Courts have committed error of law and facts in failing to take into consideration that the amount received by the Petitioners pertain to their earned wages and not pertain to their dues which Petitioners were entitled received under law.
4. ' On the other hand Mr. Mahmood Abdul Ghani; learned. Advocate for Respondent No,1 argued that both Courts have recorded concurrent findings of facts that the Petitioners had accepted the amount in satisfaction of their claims after the dismissal order passed on 15-8-1987 and such findings of facts cannot be disturbed in exercise of writ jurisdiction.
5. ' We have taken into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned. Advocate for the parties and also gone through the records. From the record it appears that the Petitioners have filed their grievance Petition before the IVth Sindh Labour Court who vide his order dated 11-8-1987 reinstated the Petitioner in the service however at the same time allowed the Respondent No, 1 to proceed with the domestic inquiry against the Petitioners. The Petitioners aggrieved from the said Order filed Appeal before the SLAT and the learned Tribunal dismissed the Appeal and held that the Order of reinstatement of the petitioners in service was erroneous. The Petitioners filed Constitution Petition No,D-962 of 1987 against the order passed by Tribunal which was allowed by this Court on 1-4-1992 and matter was remanded to Tribunal for a fresh decision in accordance with law. The learned Labour Appellate Tribunal also remanded the matter to Labour Court for fresh de novo trial by his Order dated 19-11-1995. The learned Labour Court after discussing the evidence on record come to the conclusion that the dismissal of the Petitions on 15-8-1987 was not only legal and justifiable but also that the same has been accepted by the Petitioners as they have received their legal dues as full and final settlement of their claim. This finding of fact has been affirmed by the Labour Appellate Tribunal. We have carefully gone through the record but could not find anything that the amount which Petitioners have received not A pertain their claim but pertain to their earned wages as alleged by the Petitioners before us. This finding of fact which has been recorded on the basis of evidence cannot be disturbed in exercise of writ jurisdiction.
6. ' For the foregoing reasons petition was dismissed in limine however with no order as to cost.
7. ' These are the reasons of our short order dated 24-3-2004.