| Case ID |
232874ef-c005-471d-a609-e90c18bf6515 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 39 and C.M.A. No. 1143 of |
| Decision Date |
Jul 17, 2018 |
| Hearing Date |
May 28, 2018 |
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court has adjudicated in favor of the Sindh Employees Social Security Institution, setting aside the impugned order passed by the Social Security Court No.II, Karachi dated 04.10.1997. The court affirmed that once an establishment is notified under the Provincial Employees Social Security Ordinance, 1965, it becomes legally obligated to contribute to the social security fund by operation of law. The respondents, Mehran Sugar Mills Ltd., failed to register their employees as required, thereby not only neglecting their statutory obligations but also depriving the employees of essential social security benefits. The court further emphasized that non-registration does not absolve the employer from their contribution liabilities. The appellant's role in appointing a retainer doctor and the legal intricacies surrounding the recognition of benefits under the ordinance were deemed insufficient to negate the establishment's duty to contribute. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the previous decision requiring the respondents to pay the arrears of social security contributions was overturned. However, no costs were imposed. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Sindh Employees Social Security Institution versus Mehran Sugar Mills Ltd., the Sindh High Court made a pivotal decision concerning the obligations of employers under the Provincial Employees Social Security Ordinance (X of 1965). The case, cited as 2019 SLD 846 and 2019 PLC 1, delves deep into the legal responsibilities that establishments bear in contributing to social security funds for their employees. Central to the dispute was the respondent, Mehran Sugar Mills Ltd., which was mandated to pay social security contributions for its workforce following a notification issued in the official Gazette of the Province of Sindh on 26.2.1987. The company contested this requirement, arguing that the absence of adequate medical facilities within the mill premises or nearby dispensaries absolved them of this duty. However, the court clarified that the establishment's liability to contribute arises automatically once notified, irrespective of the provision of on-site medical facilities. Furthermore, the case highlighted the legal distinction between employers and employees in the realm of social security benefits. While employers are legally bound to make contributions, the resultant benefits for employees are contingent upon proper registration with the Social Security Institution. Mehran Sugar Mills Ltd.'s failure to register its employees did not exempt it from its contribution obligations; instead, it led to the deprivation of essential benefits for the employees, which cannot be circumvented through alternative arrangements or private agreements. The legal battle saw multiple appeals and references to precedent cases, reinforcing the judiciary's stance on upholding statutory obligations over individual negotiations or settlements. The court's decision underscored the non-negotiable nature of statutory benefits and the paramount importance of regulatory compliance by employers. By overturning the Social Security Court's earlier decision and demanding the establishment to fulfill its contribution duties, the Sindh High Court reinforced the protective framework intended for workers under the social security ordinance. This case serves as a critical reference point for future deliberations on employer obligations, employee rights, and the overarching structure of social security laws in Pakistan. It emphasizes the judiciary's role in ensuring that beneficial legislations like the Provincial Employees Social Security Ordinance are effectively implemented, safeguarding the interests of the working class against potential oversights or non-compliance by employers. Keywords such as 'Social Security Contribution', 'Employer Obligations', 'Provincial Employees Social Security Ordinance', 'Sindh High Court Decision', 'Employee Benefits', 'Legal Compliance', and 'Statutory Obligations' are central to this case, reflecting current trends and priorities in legal discourse surrounding employee welfare and employer responsibilities in Pakistan's legal landscape. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Sindh Employees Social Security Institution,
MEHRAN SUGAR MILLS LTD.,
Jawad A. Sarwana,
Qadir H. Sayeed
|
| Judges |
SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
Jawad A. Sarwana,
Qadir H. Sayeed
|
| Petitioners |
Sindh Employees Social Security Institution
|
| Respondents |
MEHRAN SUGAR MILLS LTD. THROUGH SECRETARY
|
| Citations |
2019 SLD 846,
2019 PLC 1
|
| Other Citations |
1989 SCMR 888,
PLD 1984 SC 241,
1998 SCMR 440,
PLD 1989 SC 128,
Sh. Muhammad Rafique Goreja and others v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan and others 2006 SCMR 1317,
Sindh Employees' Social Security Institution v. Messrs Spencer and Company (Pak) Limited 1998 SCMR 440,
Mehran Sugar Mills LTD. v. Sindh Employees' Social Security Institution and 2 others 1991 PLC 310,
1997 PLC 473,
PLD 1977 SC 197,
C.P. No.D-550/1990,
C.P. No.D-785/1977 (People Steel Mills Ltd. v. SESSI and another),
Writ Petition No.1015/1971 of Lahore High Court in the case of Employees' Union Pakistan Tobacco Company Ltd. v. Government of Punjab and others
|
| Laws Involved |
Provincial Employees Social Security Ordinance (X of 1965)
|
| Sections |
20,
46,
46(4),
57
|