Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLD 215 = 1988 PLC(CS) 668

Revision No.FD-719 of 1986, decided on 14th March, 1987.
Presented By: Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal

MANAGING DIRECTOR, SARGROH VEGETABLE GHEE AND GENERAL MILLS, FAISALABAD and another

VERSUS

MUHAMMAD MUKHTAR KHAN

Law:

Section:

This is a revision reporting that the order dated 30-11-1986 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.4, Faisalabad summoning the petitioners to stand trial under sections 25-A (8) and 55 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 , is without jurisdiction and of no legal effect.   Vide order dated 17-11-1986 the learned Lower Court directed the petitioners to pay Rs.4,392.05 to the respondent immediately on account of reimbursement of medical charges.   It has been argued by the learned counsel for the respondent that in the present case the learned lower Court fixed the period within which the order was to be implemented, therefore, the complaint was rightly brought by the respondent himself instead of moving the learned Lower Court for the same. As mentioned above, the direction was to pay the amount immediately. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, period was fixed since the direction was to pay immediately. I cannot agree with the learned counsel to his arguments advanced on the points. The meanings of the word 'immediate' given in the 20th Century Dictionary are "with nothing between; not acting by second causes; direct, present; without delay." Since the meanings of the term are 'nothing between', 'present' or 'without delay', the learned Lower Court meant that the order be implemented forthwith. It, therefore, cannot be said that any period was fixed for the implementation of the order. Clause (a) of subsection (9) of section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 reads as, "by the workman if the order or decision in his favour is not implemented within the period specified therein." It means that some period is to be fixed from the date of announcement of the order to some other date or day within which the order is to be implemented. Since no period was fixed within which the order was to be implemented, it cannot be said that any period was fixed. Always that period is fixed which is reasonable. It could not be presumed that the petitioners had with them ready money to the tune of Rs.4,392.05, therefore, it could not be expected from them…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register