SHAFIUR REHMAN KHAN vs PUNJAB INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD And Other
The petitioner, a former Labour Welfare Officer of Paras Textile Mills Ltd., sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of his constitutional petition and Intra-Court Appeal by the Lahore High Court concerning the termination of his service and abolition of his post. The core legal question was whether the General Manager of Paras Textile Mills Ltd. was competent to terminate the petitioner's service and abolish the post, and whether such action violated section 24-A of the Factories Act. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner was appointed by the General Manager, whose appointment letter permitted termination upon notice or payment in lieu thereof, and that any alleged violation of the Factories Act carried prescribed penalties rather than entitling the petitioner to declaratory relief in constitutional jurisdiction. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed, establishing that constitutional jurisdiction will not be invoked to grant declaratory relief for statutory violations that carry specific statutory penalties.
- Whether constitutional jurisdiction can be invoked to grant declaratory relief for a violation of the Factories Act?
- Is an employee appointed by the General Manager of a mill subject to termination by the same authority under the terms of the appointment letter?
- Does the abolition of a post in violation of the Factories Act entitle an employee to reinstatement through a constitutional petition?
- Section 24-A, Factories Act
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The petitioner, a former employee of Paras Textile Mills Ltd, Bahawalpur, seeks leave to appeal against the decision of the appeal Bench of the Lahore High Court dated 11- 3-1985.
2. The petitioner held the post of Labour Welfare officer, which post wile abolished and his serviced terminated and ho wild paly for the period of notice. He challenged this order by a constitutional petition, which failed. His Intra-Court Appeal was also dismissed.
3. The learned counsel contended that the petitioner was an employee of Punjab Industrial Beard and it alone was competent to abolish the post and terminate the services of the petitioner. The abolition of the post and the termination of service, in the case of the petitioner had been ordered by the General Manager Paras Textile Mills who was not competent to pass that order. Besides, the abolition of his post was in violation of statutory provision contained in section 24-A of the Factories Act.
4. The petitioner addressed his application for appointment to General Manager, Paras Textile Mills Ltd., on 7-5-1983. The General manager issued him the appointment letter dated 23-7-1983. The appointment letter contained a condition that:- "After confirmation your service can be terminated without assigning any reason by one month's notice on either side or by paying one month's salary in lieu thereof".
5. The General Manager issued the termination order. It there is in fact a violation of section 24-A, Factories Act, the penalties there for are prescribed. There is no question of declaratory relief being granted in constitutional jurisdiction.