Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 2814 2016 SLD 2814 2016 PLC 289
National Industrial Relations Commission
Appeal No. 4A(418)/2015-K, Dated: 28th March, 2016.
DR. QAMMARUDDIN BOHRA, MEMBER
Mohammad Khurshid, Labour Representative for Applicant. Shoukat Ali Chaudhry for
Respondents.

NIAZ HUSSAIN

VS

MESSRS ALLIED BANK LIMITED THROUGH PRESIDENT AND 2 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012)--- ----Ss. 31, 54(e) & 57(2)(c)---National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973, Regln.32(2)(c)---Petition for unfair labour practice by employers---Stay application---Jurisdiction of National Industrial Relations Commission---Scope---Petitioner/ employee, who was office bearer of Federal/Labour Union in the employers Labour Union, claimed that he was born in 1958, and was to retire on attaining age of superannuation of 60 years in 2018, but employers being annoyed of his union activities had, threatened to retire him in 2015, taking year of his birth as 1955; which act of the employers, amounted to unfair labour practice---Assumption of jurisdiction of National Industrial Relations Commission for trial of the matter was dependent upon a prima facie case of unfair labour practice; but the facts narrated in the present petition, did not constitute a case of "unfair labour practice"---Jurisdiction of Commission was confined to the cases squarely falling within the scope of S.31 of Industrial Relations Act, 2012 and nothing beyond---Commission, had no jurisdiction in case of victimization on trade union activities by employee---In the present petition, no union activities, whatsoever had been mentioned to form the basis of the claim of unfair labour practice, except bald statement of apprehension---Petition, as such did not fulfil the requirements of S.54(e) of the Industrial Relations Act, 2012---Nothing was to indicate that the petitioner had been discriminated in respect of his retirement, especially when year of birth of the petitioner as 1955 had been established from his birth certificate and CNIC---All said facts had shown mala fide on the part of the petitioner/employee in filing petition---Employers, could not be said to be committing act of unfair labour practice and on merits also, the employee had no case---Petitioner/employee, having failed to establish case of unfair labour practice by the employers, not only stay application under Regln.32(2)(c) of National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedure and Functions), 1973, Regln.32(2)(c), was dismissed, but main petition…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492