PAKISTAN RAILWAYS vs ABDUL RASHEED S — 2025 PLC 106 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

PAKISTAN RAILWAYS VS ABDUL RASHEED S.O. 12---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Concurrent findings of facts---Interference by High Court---Scope---Regularization---Daily wage employees of Pakistan Railways---Order of termination in post remand proceedings during the operation/subsistence of injunctive order of Labour Court and High Court---Legality---Regularizations of other daily wage employees---Discrimination---Mala fide---Alteration in record---Scope---Respondents daily wage employees claimed their regularization against permanent posts---Plea of the petitioners was that since the services of the respondents had been terminated, therefore, they could not be regularized---Validity---Termination of service of daily wage employees, who had attained the status of permanent workmen after the expiry of the requisite period, without adhering to the procedure laid down under S.O. 12 of the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, was illegal and could not impede their claim for regularization---Evidence of mala fide on the part of the employer, such as alteration of attendance records to show unauthorized absence or discriminatory treatment in regularizing similarly situated employees, could be taken into consideration by the courts while deciding the grievance petition of the affected employees---Termination letter of respondents showed that the same related to promotion of another employee, however, on the margin of the said document a note as to termination of respondent had been given---Petitioners were not able to produce termination order of one of the respondents, which cast serious doubts about the conduct of the petitioners---Any action taken by an employer against an employee during the subsistence of an interim injunction or a status quo order issued by a court of competent jurisdiction is subject to scrutiny by the said court and cannot be used to prejudice the employee's rights in the ongoing proceedings---Concurrent findings of facts recorded by the courts below cannot be upset in Constitutional petition---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

PAKISTAN RAILWAYS vs ABDUL RASHEED S — 2025 PLC 106 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC