Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 1359 1988 SLD 1359 1988 PLC 825
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. FD-437 of 1987, decided on 20th March, 1988.
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

CHAIRMAN, AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD and 2 others

VS

MUHAMMAD KHALID RUMANI

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ---Ss.37 & 49--Appeal, presentation of--Memo. of appeal signed by Law Officer of Appellant Bank who was not party to grievance petition--Advocate signing and presenting appeal authorised by Law Officer--Objection as to maintainability of such appeal raised by,;,, opposite party--Application made thereafter by Advocate making! appearance alongwith certificates from Chairman and concerned Directors of Bank that they had instructed such Advocate to file appeal, praying for permission to sign--Memo of appeal by such Chairman and Directors--Application opposed by opposite party on plea that since limitation for appeal had expired Chairman and Directors could not be allowed to sign appeal so as to deny right accrued to opposite party by lapse of time--Plea accepted--Appeal rejected being not competent--Held: In circumstances, there was no scope either to treat appeal as having been duly brought and presented or to permit appellants to sign memo. of appeal at such stage. 1981 S C M R 687; P L D 1978 Quetta 45; P L D 1973 Vote at p.33; P L D 1969 Kar. 210 and P L D 1967 Lah. 807 distinguished. Riaz Anwar for Appellants. Ch. Muhammad 1kram for Respondent. Date of hearing: 14th March, 1988. JUDGMENT This is an appeal challenging the decision dated 10-11-1987 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 5, Sargodha, whereby the grievance petition of the respondent was accepted and he, was directed to be reinstated in service with back benefits. 2. The respondent was employed as Mobile Credit Officer on 22-7-1985 and he had taken over on 4-8-1985. He was further posted at Chiniot. His appointment was on one year's probation which was extendable to further one year. One year's period of probation was to end on 3-8-1986. Vide order dated 19-1-1987 the period of probation was extended for six months with effect from 4-8-1986 and vide order dated 27-1-1987 the respondent was informed that in view of the order of the Head Office Letter No.PT-111/19(2512)/87/2888 dated 20-1-1987 his services stood terminated with immediate effect. The respondent had challenged the said order in his grievance petition. 3.…
🔒
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