Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 771 1988 SLD 771 1988 PLC 241
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. MN-670 of 1986, decided on 27th January, 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, LAHORE

VS

ASGHAR ALI

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)---- ---Ss.25-A & 38(3)--Higher pay scale, claim for--Railway employee claiming pay scales Nos.3 and 4 as Keyman and Mate--Claimed pay scales granted by Administration during tendency of grievance petition and no evidence produced to show that petitioner was not senior-­Labour Court, in circumstances, held, was justified in accepting grievance petition allowing claim and directing petitioner to be treated as permanent Mate. Syed Intisar Hussain for Appellant. H. R. Haider for Respondent. Date of hearing: 26th January, 1987. JUDGMENT The appeal captioned above is directed against the decision dated 29-10-1986 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.9, Multan whereby the grievance petition of the respondent was accepted and the appellant was directed to fix the pay of the respondent in the scale of Keyman with effect from 15-1-1981 and further fixed his pay in the scale of the post of Mate with effect from 15-4-1984 and to allow him yearly increments from 1-12-1984 and to treat him as permanent Mate. 2. The facts are that the respondent was a Gangman and he was put to officiate as Keyman and then as Mate without allowing him the scale of said posts. He, therefore, brought grievance petition for getting the abovementioned relief. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the respondent has not yet been selected for the posts of Keyman and Mate and that he has many seniors, therefore, his grievance petition was wrongly accepted by the learned lower Court. The respondent in his statement deposed that he had been duly selected. No oral evidence was produced by the appellant to rebut the statement of the respondent. The appellant contented himself that the…
🔒
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