Pakistan Case Law
1990 SCMR 456

Syed MATLUBUL HASSAN vs BROOKE BOND PAKISTAN Ltd.

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1990 SCMR 456
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No, 42 of 1986
Date1989-06-05
Judge(s)Nasim Hasan Shah and Usman Ali Shah
Authored byNasim Hasan Shah
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the High Court, which had upheld the decisions of the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal and the Labour Court. The petitioner, a former salesman for Brooke Bond Pakistan Limited, had challenged his removal from service. The lower forums had dismissed his grievance on the preliminary ground that, as a salesman, he did not fall within the definition of a "workman" and, therefore, the Labour Court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate his claim. Upon review, the Supreme Court noted that in a previous judgment, Brooke Bond Pakistan Limited v. Conciliator appointed by the Government of Sind and others (PLD 1977 SC 237), it had already determined that a salesman falls within the definition of a "workman" under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to examine the matter further, directing the appeal to be prepared on the existing record and fixed for an early hearing.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does a salesman employed by a company fall within the definition of a 'workman' under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969?
  • Does the Labour Court have jurisdiction to entertain a grievance petition filed by a salesman against his removal from service?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 2(xxviii), Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969
workmanindustrial relationslabour court jurisdictionleave to appealsalesman statusemployment termination

ORDER

1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The petitioner, who was employed as salesman with the Brooke Bond Pakistan Limited was removed from service. He agitated against his removal before the Labour Court but the Labour Court refused to entertain his plea on the ground that on account of being a salesman he was not a "workman". Hence the Labour Court did not have any jurisdiction in this matter. This view was accepted by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal on appeal and not interfered with by the High Court in writ proceedings. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.

2. The petitioner has appeared in person and has drawn our attention to this Court's decision in Brooke Bond Pakistan Limited v. Conciliator appointed by the Government of Sind and others (PLD 1977 SC 237) wherein this Court in somewhat similar circumstances held a salesman to be a workman falling within the definition of the term in section 2(xxviii) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969.

3. ' The appeal shall be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to add further documents if any and fixed for hearing at a very early date.

4. ' Security shall be furnished in the sum of Rs,1,000.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.