Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 1082 1988 SLD 1082 1988 PLC 469
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Revision No. MN-154 of 1986, decided on 26th May, 1986.
MUHAMMAAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, 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

GENERAL MANAGER, COTTON TRADING CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN LTD. and another

VS

Syed NAZIR-ULHASNAIN and 4 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss.25-A, (8)(9), 38(5), 54 & 55--Violation of status quo order-­Remedy--Ad interim status quo order of Labour Court, held, neither an award nor decision but only a direction to maintain status quo-­Complaint of contempt proceedings under Ss.54 & 55 for violation of such order, held, was not maintainable--Remedy against violation of such order, held, would be by way of petition under S.38(5) before Labour Appellate Tribunal or complaint to some other Labour Court or, to a Magistrate under C1.9 of S.25-A. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss.54 & 55--Complaint for contempt of Court, held, could be brought only by person adversely affec;ed and not by Lawyer--Signature of Lawyer, in absence of signature of complainant, held, would not be sufficient to maintain complaint. Saeedur Rehman Farrukh for Petitioners. Muhammad Iqbal for Respondents Nos.l to 4. Nemo for Respondent No.5. Date of hearing: 21st May, 1986. ORDER This is a revision reporting that the order dated 9-2-1968 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.9, Multan is without jurisdiction and of no legal effect. 2. The facts are that on 3-11-1984 Mr. Humayun Shafiq, Petitioner No.1 issued an order which is Annexure 'A' that the Zonal Officer would make recommendations for the reduction of the staff. The District Manager issued Annexure 'B' directing some employees including respondent No.l to prepare inventory of the articles and to hand over the charge to him forthwith. This order was challenged in a petition under section 25-A, in which application for ad interim stay was moved for restraining the petitioners from taking over the charge from the respondents and from terminating their services. On that application it was ordered that status quo be maintained and the next date was fixed as 21-5-1983. No order was passed extending the said order. In the pendency of the grievance petition the services of the respondents were terminated. They, therefore, brought complaint under sections 54 and 55 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 read with Order XXXIX, rule 2(3), C.P.C. for taking…
🔒
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