| Case ID |
00844164-8040-421f-80c9-43e35322b9e1 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
KAR-511 to 513 of 1976 |
| Decision Date |
Feb 03, 1977 |
| Hearing Date |
Feb 03, 1977 |
| Decision |
These are three appeals against the order of the Labour Court dismissing the applications filed by the appellants under section 25-A, I. R. O. on the ground of limitation.
2. The appellants were in the service of the respondent railway. They received a notice dated 7th August, 1974 from the Head Train Examiner, P. W. R., Keamari that they were retired from service with effect from 7th August, 1974 as per the letter of the Assistant Personnel Officer, Pakistan Railway.
Karachi dated 6th August 1974. On receipt of this letter, the appellants filed appeals, which were dismissed on 31st March. Consequently, a grievance notice dated 20th April, 1976 was served upon the respondent and thereafter an application under section 25-A, I. R. O. was made to the Labour Court on 13th May, 1976.
3. The applications were resisted. A preliminary objection was taken that the applications were time-barred as the appellants were retired from service with effect from 7th August, 1974 while the applications under section 25-A were made on 13th May, 1976. This objection found favor with the learned Presiding Officer and he dismissed the applications as time-barred. Aggrieved by this, the present appeals were filed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and I am of the view that the learned Presiding Officer clearly erred in holding that the applications made under section 25-A, I. R. O. were time-barred. He completely disregarded the effect of the appeals, which had been filed. It has been conceded on behalf of the appellants that a right of appeal was available to the appellants. So it was in pursuance of this right that the appeals had been filed. Since the appeals were decided on 31st March 1976, the cause of action arose from that date and not from the date when the actual order of retirement was passed. This view finds support from the authority of the Supreme Court in the case of F. A. Khan v. The Government of Pakistan (P L D 1974 S C 520). It was, however, urged by the learned counsel for the respondent that the appellants delayed in pursuing the appeals earlier. I am unable to accept this argument for the simple reason that, on the contrary, the respondent failed to decide the appeals within a reasonable time and undue time was taken. The appellants could not be penalized for the carelessness of the respondent.
5. In result, I hold that the applications filed by the appellants were within time and these were wrongly dismissed. I, therefore, allow the appeals and set aside the impugned orders and remand the cases to the Labour Court for disposal on merits.
Appeals allowed. |
| Summary |
In the case KAR-511 to 513 of 1976, cited as 1978 SLD 1099 and 1978 PLC 390, the Labour Appellate Tribunal in Sindh reviewed appeals filed by S Ghulam Rasool Shaikh, Bahadur Khan, and two others against the Divisional Superintendent, P. W. R., Karachi. The appellants contested the dismissal of their applications under Section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), which pertained to retirement orders for railway employees issued on August 7, 1974. After their retirement notices, the appellants filed appeals with the Labour Court, which dismissed them on March 31, 1976, citing the applications as time-barred.
The appellants then served grievance notices in April 1976 and submitted formal applications under Section 25-A in May 1976. The central issue revolved around whether these applications were indeed time-barred, given the timelines between the retirement notice, filing appeals, and submitting applications. The Labour Court had dismissed the applications based on the limitation period, arguing that the time between retirement and application was insufficient.
Upon reviewing the case, the Tribunal found that the Labour Court had erred in its judgment. It highlighted that the filing of appeals preserved the cause of action, thereby extending the timeframe within which the appellants could validly submit their applications. Referencing the Supreme Court case F. A. Khan v. The Government of Pakistan (P L D 1974 S C 520), the Tribunal affirmed that the cause of action arose from the date the appeals were filed, not merely from the retirement date. Consequently, the applications were within the permissible time frame.
The Tribunal also addressed the respondent's argument that the appellants delayed in pursuing their appeals. It dismissed this contention, noting that the Labour Court had itself taken excessive time to decide the appeals, effectively extending the limitation period unintentionally. Therefore, penalizing the appellants for delays caused by the respondent was unjust.
In its decision, the Tribunal allowed the appeals, set aside the Labour Court's orders dismissing the applications, and remanded the cases for a fresh hearing to decide the applications on their merits. This judgment underscores the importance of procedural fairness and the protection of employees' rights against administrative delays. It also reinforces the interpretation of legal provisions to ensure that legitimate claims are not dismissed on technical grounds when administrative lapses contribute to perceived delays. |
| Court |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
|
| Entities Involved |
Labour Court,
Pakistan Railway
|
| Judges |
|
| Lawyers |
Yousaf Khan,
A. T. Mahmood
|
| Petitioners |
S GHULAM RASOOL SHAIKH,
BAHADUR KHAN and 2 others
|
| Respondents |
DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, P. W. R., KARACHI
|
| Citations |
1978 SLD 1099,
1978 PLC 390
|
| Other Citations |
F. A. Khan v. Tire Government of Pakistan P L D 1974 S C 520 rel.
|
| Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)
|
| Sections |
25-A
|