Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SINDH ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS Respondent: ALAMDIN
Court Name: Labour Appellate Tribunal Judge(s): Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi Title: SINDH ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION vs ALAMDIN Case No.: Appeal No, HYD-222 of 1988 Date of Judgment:1989-05-13 Reported As: 1990 PLC 454 Result: Appeal dismissed
Judgment DECISION This is an appeal against the order of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No, VI, Hyderabad, dated 7-5-1988, the operative part of which reads as under:-- "Since applicant has been declared to be of 58 years of age by Civil Surgeon, Mr. Mushtaq concedes that applicant shall be taken on duty forthwith with consequential benefits. Let applicant be reinstated forthwith with full benefits." 2. The bare reading of the operative part of the impugned order would show that the order was passed with the consent of both the parties and as such it was a consent order against which no appeal lies. However, Mr. Raes Mushtaq, learned Advocate for the appellants states that he did not concede to the above order. However, the record does not show that any application to this effect was moved before the learned Labour Court on the day when the order was passed or even afterwards. Mr. Wahid Bux learned representative for the respondent states that the order was passed by consent of the parties. I also find that in the memo. of appeal the grounds that have shown for setting aside the impugned order do not disclose that the counsel for the appellants did not concede to the impugned order. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the impugned order was passed with the consent of the parties. Anyhow, I do not find any point which requires consideration in appeal. 3. In view of the above circumstances, I am of the opinion that the appeal is not maintainable. As such, I would dismiss the appeal.