Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE and 3 others VS Respondent: MITSUBISHI CORPORATION (INCORPORATED IN JAPAN WITH LIMITED LIABILITY), KARACHI and another
Court Name: Labour Appellate Tribunal Judge(s): Mushtaq Ali Kazi Title:MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE and 3 others vs MITSUBISHI CORPORATION
(INCORPORATED IN JAPAN WITH LIMITED LIABILITY), KARACHI and another Case No.: Appeals Nos. KAR-156 to 159 of 1994 Date of Judgment:1995-11-30 Reported As: 1996 PLC 111 Result: Appeals dismissed Judgment DECISION ' These four connected appeals arise from order of the Labour Court No, 5, Karachi, whereby the grievance petitions of the appellants under section 25-A, I.R.O. Were dismissed as being not maintainable. Two of the appellants namely Muhammad Siddique and Sultan Mubarik are private guards and provided to the officers of the respondent-Corporation as private guards at their houses. 2. Manzoor Ellahi was provided by Security Agency as a guard at the office while Noor Zadeen was tea boy who was not in employment of anybody but he used to sell tea in that vicinity. 3. It is the case of these appellants that they were all employees of Mitsubishi Corporation but none of them have produced any appointment or termination orders. Respondents Mitsubishi Corporation have contended that they were registered under the Shops and Establishment Ordinance as they employed less than 20 workers. They have also denied that the appellants were A their employees. The learned lower Court held that the respondent's establishment was registered under the Shops and Establishment Ordinance and the Standing Orders Ordinance and the I.R.O. Were not applicable to their cases since the respondent Corporation employed less than 20 persons. The appellants in their evidence have failed to establish that the respondents employed 20 or more persons in Karachi nor have they produced any appointment and termination orders. 4. The orders of the Labour Court are accordingly maintained and these appeals are dismissed.