| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1978 SLG 1089 1978 SLD 1089 1978 PLC 375 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeals Nos. KAR-203, 114, 5, 2C4, 212, 4, ..119, 22 and 117 of 1977, decided on 10th September 1977.
GHULAM RASOOL SHAIKH, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeals Nos. KAR-203, 114, 5, 2C4, 212, 4, ..119, 22 and 117 of 1977, decided on 10th September 1977.
GHULAM RASOOL SHAIKH, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
BEECHAM (PAK.) LTD., KARACHI
VS
FOURTH SIND LABOUR COURT, KARACHI AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) And Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 189, 199 & 201Appellate Tribunal or Labour Courts not subordinate to High Court Article 201 of Constitution does not apply to Labour Courts-High Court under Art. 199, however, competent to issue any direction to any Court or Authority and question of subordination is irrelevant in such case-Exposition or enunciation of principle of law by High Court-Held, binding on Tribunal as well a9 Labour Courts. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)- -- S. 25-A-Expression "whichever is later" in subsection (6) of S. 25-A-Interpretation-Termination of services-Workman whose services terminated must approach Labour Court directly within tyro months-Procedure laid down by subsections (1) to (4) need not be adopted in such case. Nisar Ahmed v. Nizamuddin Appeal No. KAR-495 of 1976 and Messrs International Laboratories Employees' Union v. Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal (unreported) ref. (c) Interpretation of statutes- -- Redundancy cannot be attributed to Legislature nor any word or, expression treated to be superfluous-Effort to be made to reconcile various provisions of law and inconsistency to be avoided-Court should lean against construction which renders legislation futile. (d) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) -- S. 25-A (6)-Intention of subsection (6)-To do away with dilatory procedure prescribed by earlier subsections for expeditious disposal of individual grievance. (e) Industrial dispute- ------Precedents-Rule of law laid down by Division Bench of High Court-Held not only to be followed in preference to view expressed by a Single Bench but is binding. Syed Qamruddin Hassan for Appellant (in Appeal No. KAR-203 of 1977) F. M. Azad for Respondent (in Appeal No. KAR-203 of 1977) Date of hearing 2nd August 1977 DECISION These are 9 appeals against the orders passed by the various Labour Courts ordering re-instatement of the respondents with lull back benefits on applications made under section 25-A, I. R: O. 2. The respondents were in the permanent employment of different organizations. They were dismissed from service. They served grievance notices…
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