Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)

Section: 38(3a)

(a) Administration of justice---Piecemeal decision Jurisdiction Exercise of Courts not to encourage piecemeal decisions, but should generally lean towards exercising jurisdiction instead of ousting the same Where Court had found that it had jurisdiction, let matter take its own course as provided in law Even if after evidence and final arguments a decision was passed which could or could not be adverse to either of the parties, it would be open to be agitated in appeal. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) S. 38(3 a) Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of In absence of any incorrectness, illegality and infirmity in order of Labour Court, case would not be fit to be interfered with by Labour Appellate Tribunal in exercise of inherent suo motu, revisional jurisdiction under S. 38(3 a), Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. JUDGMENT These are two revision applications, filed against a common order dated 28 1 1999, passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Sindh Labour Court No.5, rejecting the preliminary objections, raised by the applicant Bank before it.. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant appears to have raised following legal objections in his reply statement before the learned Labour Court, which read as under: (1) That this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this application, while the jurisdiction rests with N.I.R.C. where the applicant had already instituted a case. (2) That since the case is already pending before the N.I.R.C. hence this Court cannot entertain this case during pendency of previously instituted also before N.I.R.C. (3) That the department section where the applicant was posted has less than 20 employees hence the provisions of I.R.O., 1969 will not be applicable and this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction. (4) That the petition is time barred. 3. The learned Presiding Officer, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the relevant record and the authorities, cited at the bar by the learned Advocate for the respondent (Bank) held that the Labour Court had jurisdiction. Mr. Mahmood A. Ghani, giving the details of case, filed by the respondent (the…

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