MUHAMMAD HAROON vs AMIN HOTEL S — 2024 PLC 245 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

MUHAMMAD HAROON VS AMIN HOTEL S. 2(n)---Worker---Scope---Terminal dues---Entitlement of Finance Manager in Hotel---Claim, filed by the petitioner (who was engaged as a Finance Manager in hotel) for recovery of his terminal dues was partially allowed, however, the Labour Court accepted the appeal of the respondents /Hotel on the ground that the deceased petitioner failed to prove himself to be a workman in accordance with law---Petitioner filed revision to assail the judgment passed by the Labour Court---Held, that, petitioner initially, while submitting his claim petition, never alleged himself to be a workman nor referred to any of his manual or clerical duties; similarly, when he appeared as a witness, he admitted in cross-examination to having been posted as Finance Manager---Record revealed that, in view of said scanty evidence of the petitioner, the Wages Court further allowed him an opportunity to submit his additional evidence of his status as a workman, but he failed to prove himself to be a worker, and record clearly suggested that he was heading the Accounts Section---A person claiming certain rights flowing from the Standing Order Act, 2013, has to prove himself to be a workman within the provision of the Standing Order Act, 2013, but the evidence produced by the petitioner was scanty and he failed to dispel the impression of his high sounding post of Finance Manager to be a non-workman---Initial burden to prove a person to be a workman is on the person, who alleges himself to be a workman and such burden will be shifted to the respondents only when such person proves himself to be a workman---In the present case, despite the Wages Court providing the petitioner sufficient opportunity, he had miserably failed to demonstrate that he was a workman within the meaning of law---Thus, the petitioner failed to prove himself to be a workman within the meaning of Standing Order Act, 2013, as such, it had no application to his case---Labour Court had rightly appreciated the questions of fact as well as of law and had rendered a proper and elaborate judgment, which required no interference in revisional jurisdiction of the High Court---Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD HAROON vs AMIN HOTEL S — 2024 PLC 245 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC