Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLG 1206 1992 SLD 1206 1992 PLC 1262
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. HYD-238 of 1980, decided on 18th February, 1991.
AHMED ALI U. QURESHI, 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

1992 P L C 1262 Messrs GHULAM HUSSAIN HIDAYATULLAH MILLS LTD.

VS

BARKAT ALI and 2 others 1992 P L C 1262 Messrs GHULAM HUSSAIN HIDAYATULLAH MILLS LTD. vs BARKAT ALI and 2 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----S.49---Section 49, Industrial Relations Ordinance is a sort of procedural provision. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----Ss. 25-A & 49---Grievance petition, matter of grievance when taken before Labour Court to be decided as if such matter was an industrial dispute---Law contemplates that the procedure to be adopted by Labour Court would be same both in industrial dispute and in the grievance petition---Held, it would not be in accordance with the scheme of Industrial Relations Ordinance to hold that S.49 was applicable to industrial dispute and not to matter which was to be decided as if the same was an industrial dispute. Syed Muhammad Hussain v. M/s. Pakistan Tobacco Co. Ltd. PLD 1980 SC 80 rel. (c) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----Ss.25-A & 49---- Grievance petition----Concept of Agency----Appearance through legal representative---Word himself used under S. 25-A ----Import of word himself----Intention of legislature was to avoid interference by any other outsid3e agency----Section 49 was applicable even to the proceedings under S.25---A---Scheme of legislation made it clear that appearance through legal practitioner was restricted and whenever he was eligible to appear it had been so enacted---Section 49, Industrial Relations Ordinance, made said intent obvious and in this view of matter it would be anomalous to introduce concept of agency in word `himself for in that eventuality the object of law could be defeated. Syed Muhammad Hussain v. M/s. Pakistan Tobacco Co. Ltd. PLD 1980 SC 80 ref. (d) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----S.25-A---Industrial Disputes Ordinance (LVI of 1959), S.34--­Representation of parties---Difference between S.25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance and S.34, Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1959---Restriction was placed on a party as it could be represented by legal practitioner only by consent of parties but in Industrial Relations Ordinance, S.49(3), such restriction was modified and representation by a legal practitioner was made subject to permission of Court. (e) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of…
🔒
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