DILBAR MASIH vs CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE S

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

DILBAR MASIH VS CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE S.O. 2(i) & Sched. Paras. 1(b) & 1(e)---Workman, status of---Whether permanent or temporary---Statutory enforcement---Scope---Internal policy/preferences/administrative will of the employers---The Doctrine of equality---Scope---Matter of the status of the petitioners as workmen (i.e. whether they are to be treated as permanent or temporary) is not to be resolved by the internal policy preferences or administrative will of the employers, but rather, it is a matter of statutory interpretation and constitutional enforcement, squarely governed by the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 ('the Ordinance'), which must be adjudicated in the light of both objective legal standards and the constitutional imperatives of equality, fairness, and due process---Where a statutory mandate exists, it overrides and takes precedence over administrative discretion---Clause 1(b) of the Schedule of the Ordinance provides that a permanent workman is one who has completed nine months of service of the work of apermanent nature, coupled with satisfactory conduct---The law confers a legal status to the nature and length of service, and not to the employer's classification or intention---Where a statute confers a right or a particular standing, no executive authority can arbitrarily deny it to the petitioners---The executive has no discretion to deny a right that has crystallized by operation of law---Where the service conditions satisfy the criteria set out in a statute, the resulting status is enforceable as a matter of right---In the present case, the petitioners had continuously served the respondents organization/department for several years in positions that were considered permanent, thereby meeting the legislative criteriaunder clause 1(b) of the Ordinance---The refusal to grant them the status of permanent workmen, despite their fulfillment of the legal requirements, is not only unlawful but also an act in defiance of legislative intent---The doctrine of equality is not a mere formality; it mandates the uniform application of legal standards to individuals in similar situations---When the State acts, it must do so fairly, justly, and equitably---Discriminatory treatment by a public authority contravenes the provisions of the Constitution---Therefore, the petitioners' exclusion is not merely an instance of administrative arbitrariness, but a constitutional violation that warrants judicial intervention---High Court set-aside the impugned judgment passed by the Labour Appellate Tribunal declaring the verbal termination of the petitioners to be illegal and unlawful, directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioners into service as "permanent workmen"---Constitutional petitions were allowed accordingly.

DILBAR MASIH vs CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE S — 2026 PLC 65 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLC