Case Details

Citation(s)
1999 SLG 813 1999 SLD 813 1999 PLC 179
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. MN-147 of 195, decision dated: 4-05-1998.
MIAN GHULAM AHMAD, 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

Rao MUHAMMAD YASIN KHAN

VS

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, MULTAN DIVISION, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, MULTAN and others

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-------Ss. 2(xxviii) & 25-A----Railway employee---Grievance petition--­Maintainability--- Petitioner who had filed grievance petition under S. 25-A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 before Labour Court, was holding a supervisory post and was drawing Rs.3,000 as monthly salary by having been placed in BPS-11---Petitioner could not claim to be a workman, having a manual duty especially when all employees of Railways had been declared to be civil servants and they could seek redress of their grievance, if any. under Civil Servants Act 1973 having recourse to Federal Service Tribunal after exhausting all Departmental remedies---Mere oral assertion of petitioner made to the effect that no one else was working under him, would not make petitioner a workman---Grievance petition file by petitioner not being maintainable, Labour Court had no jurisdiction in the matter. Muhammad Azam for Appellant. Ghulam Murtaza, Litigation Assistant, Representative for Respondents. Date of hearing: 19th December, 1997. JUDGMENT The appeal is directed against the decision dated 20-4-1995, rendered by Malik Mushtaq Ahmad, learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.8, Bahwalpur, dismissing the grievance petition of the appellant, having earlier been filed under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969. 2. Rao Ghulam Yaseen was employed by the Pakistan Railways and was attached with the Commercial Staff, in the year 1978. He states to have given his option for his promotion as S.T.E. The said promotion allegedly was delayed and he (Rao Ghulam Yaseen) was actually promoted in the year 1992, so that he suffered a lot, as is maintained, in terms of his salary, seniority, further promotion, etc. He pleads that he was entitled to promotion from April 1980, and would also be eligible to lay claim to back benefits, for the period from April 1980 onwards. 2-A. I have carefully gone through the lengthy judgment, drawn up by the learned lower Court; and I find myself wholly inclined not to uphold the contentions raised by the appellant and to agree with the observations and findings recorded by the learned Labour Court. Rao Yaseen is holding a…
🔒
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