| Case ID |
45203544-aeee-4f0e-953b-304a1d04717b |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
LHR-314 of 1980/Pb. |
| Decision Date |
Jun 16, 1982 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 07, 1982 |
| Decision |
The Labour Appellate Tribunal in Punjab accepted the appeal filed by Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi and Muhammad Iqbal against the decision of the Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore, which had dismissed their grievance petition. The primary issue revolved around the validity of the grievance notice served to the General Manager of WAPDA's Computer Centre. The Tribunal held that the General Manager fell within the definition of 'employer' as per the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, and had control over the appellant. Consequently, the grievance notice was deemed valid and proper. The Tribunal criticized the lower court for relying on the precedent 1980 P L C 334, emphasizing that the ordinance does not restrict the definition of 'employer' solely to the appointing authority. Therefore, the case was remanded back to the lower court for a decision on its merits, effectively setting aside the previous judgment. This decision underscores the broad interpretation of 'employer' in labor disputes and ensures that grievance procedures are not hindered by technicalities regarding the specific appointing authority. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case LHR-314 of 1980/Pb., decided on June 16, 1982, by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in Punjab, the dispute centered around the validity of a grievance notice served by an employee of WAPDA's Computer Centre. Appellants Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi and Muhammad Iqbal challenged the dismissal of their grievance petition by the Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore. The core issue was whether the grievance notice was appropriately served to the General Manager, who was deemed the 'employer' under the Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969). The lower court had dismissed the petition, citing a 1980 P L C 334 reference, arguing that the Operational Manager was the correct authority to receive such notices. However, the Tribunal overturned this decision, emphasizing that the definition of 'employer' in the ordinance is not limited to the appointing authority but extends to any officer with control over the workman. The Tribunal criticized the lower court for not providing substantial evidence that the Operational Manager was the exclusive appointing authority and highlighted the importance of practical control in defining employer-employee relationships. By accepting the appeal and remanding the case for a decision on its merits, the Tribunal reinforced the broader interpretation of employers in labor law, ensuring that employees can effectively utilize grievance mechanisms without being bogged down by procedural technicalities. This case serves as a critical reference for labor relations, affirming the rights of employees to have their grievances addressed by relevant managerial authorities within organizations. |
| Court |
Labour Appellate Tribunal
|
| Entities Involved |
Lahore,
WAPDA,
Labour Appellate Tribunal,
Punjab Labour Court No. 2,
Computer Centre,
Industrial Relations Ordinance,
Electric Wing,
Operational Manager
|
| Judges |
Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi
|
| Lawyers |
Malik Pervez Akhtar,
Khan Muhammad Virk
|
| Petitioners |
Muhammad Iqbal,
Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi
|
| Respondents |
Another,
The General Manager, WAPDA,
Computer Centre
|
| Citations |
1984 SLD 1605,
1984 PLC 1023
|
| Other Citations |
1980 P L C 334
|
| Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)
|
| Sections |
2 (viii),
25-A
|