| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 2133 2021 SLD 2133 2021 PLJ 89 |
Quetta High Court
C.P. Nos. 889 to 931 of 2019, decided on 25.11.2019, Date of hearing: 20.11.2019.
ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE.
Mr. Abdullah Kakar, Advocate for Petitioner.
C.P. Nos. 889 to 931 of 2019, decided on 25.11.2019, Date of hearing: 20.11.2019.
ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE.
Mr. Abdullah Kakar, Advocate for Petitioner.
NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITED, THROUGH AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND OTHErs
VS
NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION QUETTA AND OTHERS
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Industrial Relations Act, 2012
Section: 33,58
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 199--Industrial Relations Act, (X of 2012), Ss. 33 58--Back dates dismissal from service--Entitlement for dues--Filling of petitions--Allowed--Appeal-Dismissed--Closing of defence--Ex-parte proceedings--Limitation--Perusal of record reveals that not only before Full Bench of NIRC, but also before NIRC Bench Quetta, there was a lack of interest on part of petitioner to contest Proceedings properly--Employer has taken plea for delay in filing appeals that copies of order were taken from NIRC Quetta Bench and were kept in office of employer, but employees along with their other colleagues had illegally occupied office and did not allow officials of management to enter and work in office which caused delay in filing these appeals, as such, delay was not deliberate or intentional--If plea taken by employer was true, then under such circumstances employer should have initiated criminal proceedings before competent forum or to immediately approach NIRC Quetta for issuance of another copy, but this has not been done so--It is well settled principle of law that where matter is barred by time Court cannot go into merits of controversy between parties-- We have gone through orders delivered by Forums below and found no illegality or irregularity in impugned orders warranting to issue writ against same--Employer was obviously not vigilant in defending and asserting his rights and as such let period of limitation expire before approaching Full Bench of NIRC--Delay have not been explained in even a remotely convincing manner--Delay defeats equity, time and tide wait for none and law helps vigilant not indolent--Object of law of limitation is to help vigilant and not indolent--Helping hand could not be extended to a litigant on having become forgetful of his rights--Petitions dismissed. 2018 PLC (Note) 29 and 2019 CLC 164 ref. Industrial Relations Act, 2012-- ----S. 58--Appeal before appellate authority--An aggrieved party from an order of Bench of Commission, may within thirty days of such decision to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority. JUDGMENT Abdullah Baloch, JUSTICE.--This commission judgment disposes of above titled…
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