| Case ID |
179fd311-ad44-45b2-a190-06baecf1433d |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Constitutional Petition No. 102 of 1980 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 15, 1988 |
| Hearing Date |
Mar 15, 1988 |
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the Labour Court with direction to allow the parties to present evidence on whether the petitioner or the company can be treated as the employer of the canteen staff, in accordance with the relevant statutes and rules. The court determined that the initial objection raised by the petitioner was not sufficient to dismiss the case without a thorough examination of the factual employment relationship. Therefore, the matter requires further investigation to establish the legal obligations and responsibilities of the parties involved. The petition was disposed of with no order as to costs. |
| Summary |
In the significant legal case adjudicated on March 15, 1988, by the Sindh High Court, Constitutional Petition No. 102 of 1980 was filed by Zahid Majid against the Labour Officer and Inspector of Factories, Sukkur, along with three other respondents. The core of the dispute revolved around the interpretation and enforcement of the Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), and the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968). Zahid Majid, representing Exxon Chemical Pakistan Limited, challenged the imposition of legal dues under section 7(2) of the Ordinance, asserting that the company was not the employer of the canteen staff, as they were employed by an independent contractor, respondent No.3.
The petitioner argued that the impugned order did not fall within the appeal provisions outlined in section 37(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, thus negating the necessity of filing an appeal under the Ordinance before seeking constitutional jurisdiction. The court evaluated whether the petitioner was indeed exempt from such appeals by scrutinizing the statutory definitions and obligations pertaining to employer-employee relationships.
Key legal arguments included the examination of whether Exxon Chemical Pakistan Limited had administrative control, financial responsibility, and authoritative power over the canteen staff, as mandated by the relevant laws. Precedents such as Shahab Industries Ltd. v. Shah Nimroze and Muhammad Umar v. M.M. Ispahani Ltd. were referenced to establish that the nature of the contractual relationship with the independent contractor determined the liability for legal dues.
The Sindh High Court concluded that while the petitioner's preliminary objections were valid, the substantive issues required a comprehensive analysis through evidence presentation. Consequently, the court remanded the case to the Labour Court to facilitate a detailed examination of whether the petitioner or the independent contractor was the rightful employer of the canteen staff. This decision underscores the importance of clear contractual terms and statutory compliance in defining employer responsibilities within Pakistan's legal framework. The ruling highlights the necessity for employers to thoroughly assess their obligations under industrial laws to avoid legal disputes related to employee rights and dues, thereby promoting fair labor practices and adherence to established legal standards. This case serves as a pivotal reference for future industrial relations litigation, emphasizing meticulous adherence to legal provisions and the critical role of evidence in resolving employment disputes. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Exxon Chemical Pakistan Limited
|
| Judges |
Ajntal Mian, J
|
| Lawyers |
Mushtaq Memon,
Khan Sanaullah Khan
|
| Petitioners |
Zahid Majid
|
| Respondents |
and 3 others,
Labour Officer and Inspector of Factories, Sukkur
|
| Citations |
1988 SLD 1414,
1988 PLC 914
|
| Other Citations |
Pakistan and another v. Qazi Ziauddin P L D 1962 S C 440,
Nagina Silk Mill, Lyallpur v. The Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Lyallpur P L D 1963 S C 322,
The Murree Brewery Co Ltd. v. Pakistan through the Secretary to Government of Pakistan Works Division and 2 others P L D 1972 S C 279,
Sky Rooms Ltd., Karachi v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise & Land Customs, Karachi P L D 1982 Kar. 244,
Shahab Industries Ltd., Karachi v. Shah Nimroze 1974 P L C Note 60 at p. 33,
Pakistan Burmah Shell Ltd., Karachi and 3 others v. Sind Labour Court No. IV, Karachi and another P L D 1978 Kar. 109,
Muhammad Umar and 25 others v. M.M. Ispahani Ltd., Karachi 1980 P L C 888
|
| Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969),
Constitution of Pakistan (1973),
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)
|
| Sections |
37(3),
25-A,
34,
35(5)(c),
Art. 199,
2(e)(vii),
7(2)
|