| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 1886 2007 SLD 1886 2007 PLC 372 |
Sindh High Court
Labour Revision Application No.43 of 2003, decision dated: 26-02-2007.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED, CJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Labour Revision Application No.43 of 2003, decision dated: 26-02-2007.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED, CJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
PEARL CONTINENTAL HOTEL, KARACHI through Acting Human Resource Manager and Chief Security Officer
VS
PEARL CONTINENTAL HOTEL, KARACHI WORKERS UNION through General Secretary PEARL CONTINENTAL HOTEL, KARACHI through Acting Human Resource Manager and Chi
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XCI of 2002)-------S. 48(3)---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Revisional powers could only be exercised by the Court on its own motion as distinguished from "on the application of an aggrieved party"---Basically the revisional power of the High Court was only exercisable suo motu or on the court's own motion and no party could claim a right to file a revision application or demand its entertainment---Nevertheless, any party could lay appropriate information before the court and only when the court was satisfied that miscarriage of justice had taken place or proceedings in the revision would foster the cause of justice, it could exercise its suo motu powers and issue notice to the other parties---Upon issuance of such notice the parties would be entitled to be heard. Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd. v. Muhammad Javed Iqbal PLD 1984 Kar. 519 and 1986 SCMR 1071 ref. Mahmood Abdul Ghani, Chaudhry Rasheed Ahmed, Muhammad Humayun, M.A.K. Azmati, Ashraf Hussain Rizvi, Latif Sagar, Shahid Anwar Bajwa, S.M. Yaqoob, Nasir Mahmood, Qamaruddin Hassan, Gohar Iqbal, Ghulam Sarwar Chandio, Muhammad Abdullah, Muhammad Naveed Salim and Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Advocates. ORDER SABIHUDDIN AHMED, C.J.---The above and all other revision applications placed in Court today are directed against several orders passed by the Labour Courts under provisions other than sections 46, 33 or 44(4-c) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002. When some of these matters came up before me on 7-8-2006. I was a little doubtful whether revision applications against orders which were not appealable were maintainable at the behest of an aggrieved party. It may be appropriate in this context to reproduce section 48(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002. "48. Appeal to the High Court.--- (1) The High Court may, on appeal, confirm, set aside, vary or modify the award or decision given under section 46 or 33 a sentence passed under clause (c) of subsection (4) of section 44 and shall exercise all the powers conferred by this Ordinance on the Labour Court, save as otherwise provided. (2)…
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