| Case ID |
3252527f-cf95-4c21-9b4c-2a329453e4a7 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Petition No. 90 of 1976 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 30, 1976 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab dismissed the petition filed by Muhammad Azam against the National Bank of Pakistan, Gujranwala. The Tribunal held that the terms and conditions of Azam's appointment as a temporary Godown Keeper did not guarantee the right to re-instatement. Since the appointment was temporary and the Staff Services Rules did not provide for temporary appointments, the petitioner had no legal grounds for re-instatement. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. |
| Summary |
In the case of Muhammad Azam versus National Bank of Pakistan, Gujranwala, the Labour Appellate Tribunal of Punjab delivered a pivotal decision on March 30, 1976. The petitioner, Muhammad Azam, sought re-instatement after his termination from the position of a temporary Godown Keeper at the National Bank of Pakistan. The core of the dispute revolved around the Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), specifically Section 25-A, which addresses the re-instatement of employees under certain conditions. Azam was appointed on a temporary basis with a fixed term of six months, subject to early termination without notice. He was dismissed before the completion of his six-month term, leading him to challenge the termination in court.
Azam's legal representation argued that the Staff Services Rules of 1973 should apply to his case, asserting that these rules do not recognize temporary appointments and that only the appointing authority has the power to terminate services. They referenced a similar case, National Bank of Pakistan v. Pervaiz, to support their claim, highlighting that in the cited case, the respondent had been employed for more than six months, setting a precedent for re-instatement rights.
However, the Tribunal found significant distinctions between the two cases. The key factor was the temporary nature of Azam's appointment, which was not covered under the Staff Services Rules. The Tribunal agreed with the respondent's counsel that the terms outlined in the appointment letter took precedence, especially in the absence of provisions for temporary appointments within the Staff Services Rules. The termination of Azam's employment, along with 57 other Godown Keepers, was deemed lawful under the agreed terms, which did not provide for guaranteed re-instatement.
Furthermore, the Tribunal emphasized that the financial constraints faced by the National Bank of Pakistan, such as the inability to advance loans beyond three to four months against paddy stocks, necessitated temporary appointments. This operational requirement justified the termination of temporary employees without the obligation of re-instatement.
In conclusion, the Labour Appellate Tribunal upheld the dismissal of Azam's petition, reinforcing the importance of adhering to contractual terms and the limitations of existing labor laws concerning temporary employment. This case underscores the critical need for clear terms in employment contracts and highlights the challenges faced by temporary employees in securing job protection under prevailing labor regulations. |
| Court |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
|
| Entities Involved |
National Bank of Pakistan,
Gujranwala
|
| Judges |
RAI ABDUR RAZZAQUE KHAN PRESIDING OFFICER
|
| Lawyers |
Zafar Salim,
Abdul Hamid
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD AZAM
|
| Respondents |
NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN, GUJRANWALA
|
| Citations |
1978 SLD 1004,
1978 PLC 212
|
| Other Citations |
National Bank of Pakistan v. Pervaiz
|
| Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance, XXIII of 1969
|
| Sections |
25-A
|