Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 1122 1988 SLD 1122 1988 PLC 500
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Revision Petitions No. RI-602 to 610 of 1987, decided on 25th November, 1987.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD 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

DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, RAWALPINDI

VS

NOOR KHAN and 8 others

Law:

Section:

Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)-- ---Ss.15(2) & 17--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S.38(3-a)--Ad interim stay--Jurisdiction of Authority to grant-­Authority under Payment of Wages Act, 1936 if competent to decide question raised in main petition before it, held, has jurisdiction to stop further deductions till decision of case--Railway administration starting deductions of overtime wages on plea of being excess-­Employees bringing application under S.15(2) of Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and praying for interim stay order restraining Railway administration from making further deductions--Authority passing stay order and same maintained in appeal by Labour Court--Revision against such order rejected by Appellate Tribunal in limine. Ch. Muhammad Yousaf for Petitioner. Date of hearing: 25th November, 1987. ORDER The revisions captioned above report that the orders dated 18-10-1987 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.6, Rawalpindi, are without jurisdiction and of no legal effect. 2. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in all the nine revisions mentioned above, they are being disposed of together through this single judgment. 3. The facts are that on the plea that overtime wages were paid in excess, the petitioner started deductions and the respondents brought applications under section 15 (2) of the Payment of Wages Act. The respondents applied for interim stay to restrain the petitioner from making further deductions till the final decision of the main cases. The said petitions have been accepted by the learned lower court. 4. It has been argued- by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Court had no jurisdiction to issue a stay order with regard to the wages which have not yet fallen due to…
🔒
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