| Case ID |
0f775c4a-826e-4173-9c73-f8912babf3f7 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No. 434 of 1998 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 20, 2003 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Sahibzada K.A.K. Afridi, who contended that he was a 'workman' under the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968. The Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts that determined Afridi, as an Office Sales Manager, held a supervisory position and thus did not qualify as a workman under the relevant definitions. The ruling reinforced the distinction between managerial roles and the definition of workman, emphasizing the nature of duties performed, which required independence and initiative contrary to manual or clerical work. The Court found the findings of the Labour Court, Labour Appellate Tribunal, and the High Court to be justified and well-supported by evidence, concluding that the appeal lacked merit. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the definition and classification of 'workman' within the context of employment law in Pakistan. The Supreme Court of Pakistan adjudicated on the appeal of Sahibzada K.A.K. Afridi against the termination of his services as an Office Sales Manager. The critical issue was whether Afridi fell under the definition of a workman as outlined in the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, or if he was more appropriately categorized as an officer given the supervisory nature of his role. The Court meticulously analyzed the duties and responsibilities associated with Afridi's position, considering the allowances and benefits he received, which indicated a higher level of responsibility than that of a typical workman. The ruling ultimately reinforced the legal interpretations of employment classifications, making it clear that managerial roles do not fit the traditional definition of workman. This case is significant for legal practitioners and employees in similar positions, as it sets a precedent regarding the interpretation of employment roles and rights under Pakistani labor law. Keywords such as 'workman classification', 'employment law Pakistan', 'Supreme Court rulings', and 'managerial roles' are trending in legal discussions, making this case highly relevant for ongoing employment law discourse. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
ALLIED ENGINEERING & SERVICES LTD.
|
| Judges |
SHEIKH RIAZ AHMAD, C.J.,
QAZI MUHAMMAD FAROOQ,
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ
|
| Lawyers |
Qalb e Hasan, Advocate Supreme Court,
M. A. Zaidi, Advocate on-Record
|
| Petitioners |
Sahibzada K.A.K. AFRIDI
|
| Respondents |
ALLIED ENGINEERING & SERVICES LTD. through Managing Director and 2 others
|
| Citations |
2004 SLD 924,
2004 SCMR 523
|
| Other Citations |
Pakistan Tobacco Company Ltd. v. Pakistan Tobacco Company Employees' Union, Dacca and 2 others PLD 1961 SC 403 rel.
|
| Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969,
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
|
| Sections |
25 A,
2(i),
185(3)
|