Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---S.25-A(1) & (4)--Distinction between Ss.25-A(1) & 25-A(4) illustrated--Word "himself" used in S.25-A(1) emphasized to exclude an attorney for purpose of bringing grievance petition to employer--Worker was, however authorised to employ an attorney for taking matter to Labour Court. Gulistan v. Pakistan Railways 1981 P L C 760 and Gulistan v. Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi and 2 others 1982 P L C 1007 ref. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)---- ---S.25-A (1) & (4)--Provisions to be interpreted harmoniously--Agents other than those specifically mentioned, viz. either Shop Steward or Collective Bargaining Agent, held, excluded. Gulistan v. Pakistan Railways 1981 P L C 760; Gulistan v. Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal, Karachi and 2 others 1982 P L C 1007 and Syed Muhammad Hussain v. Messrs Pakistan Tobacco Company Limited and another P L D 1980 S C 80 ref. (c) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss. 25-A(1) & (4), 36 & 49--Section 25-A(1) could not be considered in complete isolation of other provisions of S.25-A--Main purport of S.25-A stated--Notwithstanding provisions of S.36, of Ordinance, 1969 institution of representation through agents was out of question--Civil Procedure Code, 1908 as a whole was not applicable and could not, therefore, be applied by giving an extensive consideration to S. 36-­Labour Court was a Court of special jurisdiction dealing with problems arising between an employer and employee without intermeddling of any outside agent--Representation through a counsel was, therefore, subject to leave of Court and not as a matter of right. Sher Muhammad v. Chairman, Industrial Court of West Pakistan and others 1967 P L C 147 and Karachi Union of Employers and others v. The Industrial Court, Karachi and others P L D 1961 S C 57 ref. (d) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---- ---Art.199--Very initiation of proceedings before Tribunal was hit by law--Held, it was open to petitioner to avail constitutional jurisdiction. Muhammad Afzal Siddiqui for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent No.1. Muhammad Asghar Malik for Respondent No.2. Date of…

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