1. ' Muhammad Ramzan, the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "Ramzan") was a permanent workman/employee of Surriya Textile Mills (Pvt.) Ltd., respondent No,1 (hereinafter referred to as "Surriya"). By Certificate dated 24-2-1997 a Medical Board consisting of the Principal, Liaquat Medical College, Mr. Jan Mohammad Memon, Professor of Medicine, Dr. Abdul Qadir Sheikh, Professor of Surgery, L.M.C. Jamshoro/Hyderabad and Civil Surgeon. Services Hospital, Hyderabad declared Ramzan to be completely and permanently incapacitated for further service of any kind in Surriya as a consequence of Acute Bronchitis. At the time of the settlement of dues Surriya did not pay to ,Ramzan the amount of Group Insurance under Standing Orders 10-B of W.P. Industrial and Commercial employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, (hereinafter referred to as "the Standing Orders"). Consequently, he filed an application before the Commission of Workmen's Compensation at Dadu, Thatta and Hyderabad under S.O. 10-B read with section 8(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as "the Compensation Act") seeking a direction to Surriya to deposit the amount of Group Insurance with the Commissioner for payment to him. After recording the evidence and hearing the parties, the Commissioner by Order dated 23- 12-1999 dismissed the application holding that Ramzan was not a workman under the Standing Orders and that his Medical Certificate of disablement was dubious.
2. ' The relevant portion of section 30 of the Compensation Act which deals with appeals reads as follows:-- "30. Appeals.---(1) An appeal shall lie to the Tribunal from following orders of a Commissioner, namely:--
(a) an order awarding as compensation a lumpsum whether by way of redemption of a half monthly payment or otherwise or disallowing a claim in full or in part for a lumpsum;
(b) an order refusing to allow redemption of a half-monthly payment;
(c) an order providing for the distribution of compensation among the dependents of a deceased workman, or disallowing any claim of a person alleging himself to be such dependent;
(d) an order allowing or disallowing any claim for the amount of an indemnity under the provisions of subsection (2) of section 12; or
(e) an order refusing to register a memorandum of agreement or registering the same or providing for the registration of the same subject to conditions: ' Provided that no appeal shall lie against any order unless a substantial question of law is involved in the appeal and, in the case of an order other than an order such as is referred to in clause (b), unless the amount in dispute in the appeal is not less than three hundred rupees: ' The section provides for five situations indicated in clause (a) to clause (e) in which an appeal to Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") can be filed from an ordei of the Commissioner. None of the five clauses refer to an order relating to payment of group insurance undei S.O. 10-B of the Standing Orders. Consequently, no appeal can be filed to the Tribunal against an order of the Commissioner dismissing an application asking for deposit of the group insurance amount under S.O. 10-B with the Commissioner. In such a situation the only remedy available to an aggrieved party is to file a Constitution Petition. Accordingly, Ramzan filed the present petition in the High Court which was admitted for regular hearing on 2-3-2000.
3. ' It transpires that on the basis of an ex parte inquiry in August 1997, Ramzan was dismissed from service by Surriya on the ground of misconduct. Ramzan after complying with the legal requirements filed an application under section 25-A, I.R.O. .Before the Sindh Labour Court No, VI at Hyderabad, who dismissed his application by order. Dated 23-11-1999 holding that Ramzan was not a workman at the time of his dismissal. Ramzan filed Appeal No,Hyd-324 of 1999 before the Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi (hereinafter referred to as "the. Tribunal"). The learned Chairman of the Tribunal, after hearing the parties by decision dated 17-10-2000 allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Labour. Court and the order of dismissal by Surriya and because Ramzan had been declared unfit for further service by a duly constituted Medical Board, ordered that Surriya shall take necessary steps for retirement of Ranizan and pay him all the back-benefits as well as the additional monetary benefit in the shape -of Group Insurance, gratuity and other benefits accruing to him on- his retirement.
4. ' Mr. Ashraf H. Rizvi, learned Advocate for the appellant Ramzan stated that Surriya had paid all the benefits of retirement from the establishment except the Group Insurance amount. He contended that Surriya did not file any Constitution petition against the decision of the B Tribunal and as such the judgment of the Tribunal declaring Ramzan as a workman attained finality. He further stated that after admission of this petition Surriya had deposited the Group Insurance amount with the Nazir of this Court who had invested it in a profitable scheme.
5. ' On consideration of the decision of the Tribunal and the arguments of the learned Counsel, it is clear that Ramzan was a workman at the time of his dismissal and as such is entitled to all the benefits specified in the Standing Orders and that he was declared unfit for service by a competent Medical Board and consequently the Tribunal orderes, among others, payment of the Group Insurance amount to Ramzan. I have gone through the provisions of the Standing Orders and S.O. 10-B as well as the decision of the Tribunal and am satisfied that Ramzan is entitled to payment of the Compulsory Group Insurance amount under S.O. 10-B. Neither Surriya has appeared to contest the above legal position nor can it be disputed in light of the provisions of the Standing Orders that he is not entitled to the benefits claimed as discussed above.
6. ' Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the Nazir is directed to pay to Ramzan the Group Insurance amount deposited with him together with the profit accrued thereon after his proper identification.