KARACHI SHIPYARD AND ENGINEERING WORKS LTD. vs SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

KARACHI SHIPYARD AND ENGINEERING WORKS LTD. VS SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S. 34---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Grievance petition---Right, accrual of---Limitation---Higher pay-scale of worker, entitlement to---Grievance of the Worker, who was initially appointed in pay-scale-02 , was that he ought to have been appointed in pay-scale -05---Labour Court dismissed grievance petition of the worker for having been filed after sixteen years of accrual of his alleged grievance---Employer (Karachi Shipyard and Engineering Works Ltd.) invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court as the Labour Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') allowed appeal preferred by the worker reversing the findings of the Labour Court holding the limitation was mere technicality---Validity---Ambit of the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court is not that of a subsequent forum of statutory appeal and is restricted inter alia to appreciate whether any manifest illegality is apparent from the judgment impugned---It is also duty of High Court to ensure that any discretion exercised by the subordinate forum was done judiciously pursuant to sound legal principles and not contrary to law or usage having the force of law---In the present case, evidence (including the relevant cross-examination) having been adduced by the grievance petitioner (worker) in the proceedings before the Labour Court demonstrated that the petitioner was aware of his pay-scale at the time of his appointment in the year 1995; he admitted having received the salary from time to time and clearly stated that the terms of engagement never said that his employment would be in pay-scale 5---Prescriptions of limitation are not mere technicalities and disregard thereof would render entire law of limitation otiose---It is incumbent upon the Courts to first determine whether the proceedings filed before them were within time and the Courts are mandated to conduct such a exercise regardless of whether or not an objection has been taken in such regard---Each day of delay had to be explained---Section 34 of the Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013 provides a time-period of three months for a worker to bring his grievance to light, from the date of accrual of cause---In the present case, the cause was brought to light well beyond the limitation period and said fact had not been controverted in the impugned judgment---High Court observed that the Tribunal erred in disregarding the applicable law of limitation---Evidence before the Tribunal did not support its finding, which , prima facie, were rested on unjustified surmises and conjectures---Tribunal articulated no cavil to the grievance being hopelessly time-barred, however, inordinately disregarded the law of limitation while terming the same merely technical---High Court viewed that the impugned judgment was predicated upon erroneous assumption of facts misapplication of the law, hence, could not be sustained---High Court set aside the impugned judgment passed by the Labour Appellate Tribunal---Constitutional petition filed by the employer, was allowed, in circumstances.

KARACHI SHIPYARD AND ENGINEERING WORKS LTD. vs SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S — 2024 PLC 100 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC