| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 2482 1989 SLD 2482 1989 PLC 892 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. GA-446 of 1987, decided on 25th January, 1988.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. GA-446 of 1987, decided on 25th January, 1988.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
KHADIM HUSSAIN
VS
CLIMAX ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD.
Law:
Section:
(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XIII of 1969)---- ---Ss. 25-A & 38(3)--Grievance petition--Presentation of--Petition presented by Advocate--Petitioner appeared for first time subsequently when limitation period had expired--Labour Court dismissing petition as time-barred--Held: Petition, in circumstances, should have been rejected for improper presentation and not dismissed as time-barred. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)----- ---S. 25-A--Grievance petition against termination of service--Estoppel--Question of estoppel, held, did not arise unless total dues were paid and received without protest. Appellant in person. Sh. Ezad Masud for Respondent. Date of hearing: 25th January, 1988. JUDGMENT The appeal captioned above challenges the decision dated 3-11-1987 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 7, Gujranwala whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his reinstatement in service has been dismissed on the grounds that on the date on which the appellant appeared in person for the first time after presentation the appeal was time barred and that on account of receiving benefits without protest he is estopped from bringing the grievance petition. 2. The facts of the case are that according to the appellant a fictitious resignation was prepared whereas he never resigned from the post and on the basis of the said resignation his services were terminated. Since the learned lower Court has not recorded any finding on the merits of the case nothing can be said in this respect. 3. The finding of the learned lower Court on the point that the petition was not properly presented and that the appellant did not appear within the limitation before the learned lower Court is correct. An application was given by the respondent for the rejection of the petition on the ground that it was not properly presented. The appellant riled reply to the said petition on 26-6-1986. The learned lower Court directed that the point of presentation would be decided alongwith the decision of the main case. The learned counsel for the appellant in the learned lower Court closed evidence for the appellant on 6-10-1986. Since an…
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