AMAN ULLAH vs UNITED BANK LIMITED S — 2024 PLC 37 SUPREME-COURT

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

AMAN ULLAH VS UNITED BANK LIMITED S. 2(xxxiii)---Workman---Scope---Mere nomenclature of an assigned post is not relevant in determining the status of an employee and assessing whether he is performing the duties of a worker or workman, or a manager, officer or supervisor---Rather the paramount and predominant consideration is the nature of the job, and if any employee claims that he was performing the duties of a worker/workman, the burden lies on him to discharge if he claims contrary to the job description assigned to him separately or by means of appointment letter or subsequently made any change in the job description through up-gradation or promotion which detached or estranged the status of employee from workman to managerial or supervisory post---Litmus test is the nature of job actually being performed rather than the nomenclature of the job simpliciter. Citation Name: 2024 PLC 37 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case AMAN ULLAH VS UNITED BANK LIMITED Ss. 2(xxxiii) & 33---Workman---Scope---Manager of a private Bank---Whether a workman for purposes of Industrial Relations Act, 2012---Held, that record reflected that the petitioner was posted as Manager of a private bank's branch and also had the power of attorney of the Bank and two other persons, namely the Operation Manager, and the Chief Teller, both were performing their duties under the petitioner's supervision---Petitioner admitted that his functions included managing, coaching and monitoring of staff; it was also his job to physically verify and check vouchers and cash at the time of closing of the Branch every day---During further cross-examination, the petitioner admitted that in light of the powers granted to him in the power of attorney, he used to supervise, cancel and pass instruments during the course of his daily work---Wide ranging and comprehensive powers conferred upon the petitioner were of such nature and responsibility that could only be granted to a person having the status of manager, officer or the person having the category of supervisory duties---All courts below after proper appreciation of facts rightly held that the petitioner was not 'workman', hence he could not maintain a grievance petition in the NIRC---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused.

AMAN ULLAH vs UNITED BANK LIMITED S — 2024 PLC 37 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC