PRESIDENT, ALLIED BANK LTD. and others vs SHAUKAT NASEEM
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which set aside an order of the Punjab Labour Court No. 8, Bahawalpur, regarding the territorial jurisdiction to hear a service dismissal dispute. The respondent, an employee of the Allied Bank of Pakistan, challenged his dismissal, but the Labour Court initially dismissed his petition for lack of territorial jurisdiction, citing his posting at Lodhran. The High Court reversed this, finding jurisdiction existed. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the Punjab Labour Court No. 8, Bahawalpur, possessed the requisite territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the respondent's grievance. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, noting that the respondent had previously served in Bahawalpur and that the bank's dismissal letter explicitly directed him to settle his final dues through the Regional Office in Bahawalpur, thereby establishing that a part of the cause of action arose within that jurisdiction. The Court held that where a part of the cause of action arises within a court's territorial limits, that court is competent to adjudicate the matter.
- Does a Labour Court have territorial jurisdiction to hear a dismissal grievance if a part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction?
- Can a direction in a dismissal letter to settle dues at a specific regional office establish the territorial jurisdiction of a Labour Court in that area?
ORDER
' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- The petitioner-Allied Bank of Pakistan, seeks leave to appeal from judgment, dated 9-12-2004, passed by a learned Single Judge of the. Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, in R.F.A. No,25 of 2003.
2. The respondent, an employee of the Allied Bank of Pakistan, was dismissed from service of the Bank, by letter dated 25-1-2002. He was directed to settle his final dues through the Regional Office of the Bank at Bahawalpur. The respondent challenged his dismissal from service by way of filing a petition before the Punjab Labour Court No,8, A Bahawalpur, which was dismissed by order, dated 25-2-2003, for lack of territorial jurisdiction. Therefore, he preferred R.F.A. No,25 of 2003 which was allowed, by the impugned judgment, dated 9-12-2004, by the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench with the direction to the parties to appear before the Punjab Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur.
Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner Bank submitted that at the time of his dismissal the respondent was posted at Lodhran falling within the territorial jurisdiction of the Punjab Labour Court at Multan. Therefore, the Punjab Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur lacked the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition of the respondent and to adjudicate upon the matter.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent in person. The respondent brought to our notice that Lodhran Branch of the Bank was under the Regional Office of the Bank at Bahawalpur and that he also remained posted at Bahawalpur which fell within the jurisdiction of the Punjab Labour Court No,8, Bahawalpur. Not only that the respondent was directed through the letter of dismissal to settle his final dues through the Regional Office of the Bank at Bahawalpur where a part of cause of action had arisen. In these circumstances, the learned High Court was justified in holding that the Punjab Labour Court No,8 was possessed the necessary territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter. The assumption of jurisdiction of a Labour Court over the subject-matter had not been called in question. In our opinion, the impugned judgment does not suffer from any legal infirmity so as to warrant interference by this Court. This is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
5. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly.