Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLG 1968 1991 SLD 1968 1991 PLC 892
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Revision Applications Nos. KAR-90, 91, 92, 93 and 94 of 1991, decided on 20th May, 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

GULZAR ABBASS and 4 others

VS

DISTRICT MANAGER, KTC, KARACHI GULZAR ABBASS and 4 others vs DISTRICT MANAGER, KTC, KARACHI

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----Ss. 25-A, 36 & 38(3-a)---Status quo---Interim stay order granted by one of the Labour Courts in earlier case similar to case of applicants, having been maintained by Tribunal, it would not be proper and just to refuse interim stay to present applicants---Status quo was granted by Tribunal to applicants which would continue till decision of grievance petition of applicants. Revision Applications Nos. KAR-119 to 127 of 1991 and Kar-134 of 1991 ref. Latif Saghar for Applicants. Gul Muhammad Soomro, Representative for Respondent. Date of hearing: 20th May, 1991. DECISION These five suo motu revision applications are against the orders of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No. IV at Karachi, dated 7-2-1991, whereby the learned Labour Court dismissed the Interim Stay Applications of the applicants. 2. I have heard Mr. Latif Saghar, learned Advocate for the applicants and Mr. Gul Muhammad Soomro, learned representative for the respondents. 3. The brief facts of the case appear to be that applicants Gulzar Abbass and Muhammad Siddique were initially appointed as `Conductors' by the respondents while three applicants namely, Ghulam Rabbani, Iftikhar Hussain and Ashique Hussain were appointed as `Drivers'. The applicant's claim to be working in higher grades viz. Traffic Assistants and Assistant Yard Masters since about six years, when they were reverted to their original posts vide separate orders by respondents in November and December, 1990. After serving grievance notices upon the respondent the applicants filed grievance petitions before learned Labour Court which are still pending. They had moved Interim Stay Applications, on which initially ad interim stay was granted by the learned Labour Court, but subsequently ad-Interim stay was vacated and the Stay Applications of the applicants were dismissed by the learned Labour Court vide impugned orders. 4. Mr. Latif Saghar has mainly relied upon the decision of this Tribunal, dated 28-4-1991 in suo motu Revision Applications Nos. KAR-119 to 127 of 1991 and KAR-134 of 1991. In the aforesaid decision 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