ASPRO NICHOLAS EMPLOYEES' UNION, KARACHI Versus M/S. ASPRO NICHOLAS .(PAK.) LTD., KARACHI

DECISION

Shorn of all details suffice it to say, that an application had been presented by M/s. Aspro Nicholas Employees' Union under section 50 of the I.R.O. as certain doubts and difficulties had arisen in regard to "claim of payment of cost of living allowances allowed to employees under the newly inserted provision of section 3(6) of the Employees' Cost of Living (Relief) Act, 1973.

2. It appears that there was a settlement between the parties and as a result of the settlement the respondent had granted certain increases in the salaries and allowances to their employees. As reference has been made to only two clauses of the agreement it will be proper to reproduce the clauses in regard to the salary; the other can be dispensed with.

(1) ANNUAL INCREMENT

It has been agreed that all the workers shall be allowed annual increment during the operative period of this settlement irrespective of the fact whether he/she has reached the maximum ceiling of the respective scale/scale as a special case, so that he/she may not suffer in terms of any monetary loss.

(2) SALARY INCREASE

With effect from 1st January, 1984 all the permanent employees on the payroll of the Company at the time of signing of this agreement shall be accorded an increase equivalent of two graded increments."

The settlement also had the following clause in it.

"II‑General‑‑

(d) The increases granted in the salary and allowance as per this agreement are agreed upon taking into consideration the rise in the price structure, cost of living. Therefore, if the Government by notification grants further increase in allowance etc., for the said reasons, the increase in the salaries and allowances granted under the agreement will be adjusted if the adjustment is allowed in the Government Notification otherwise the same will be paid according to the relevant notification."

3. In view of the express terms in which the said clause has been mentioned, there is neither any doubt nor difficulty in interpretation.

4. Demonstrably the increases were substantial and awarded to alleviate the distress of the employees because of spiralling prices. The settlement also shows that the parties had an eye on the set‑off clause of the Employees' Cost of Living Act, 1973 in the earlier years. The interpretation as placed by the employers, under the circumstances, cannot be open to any exception.

Orders accordingly.

H.B.T./2165/Lb.S Order accordingly.