ABDUR RAHMAN vs THE CHAIRMAN — 1970 PLC 369

Citation: 1970 PLC 369

Court: Industrial Court

Year: 1968

Decision Date: 1968-05-25

Parties: ABDUR RAHMAN vs THE CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN WESTERN RAILWAY; LAHORE

Headnotes

Result: N/A Judgment AWARD This is an application by Abdul Rehman Fitter under sections 11 and 12 of the West Pakistan Indust8al Disputes Ordinance, 1968, .by which he has requested this Court; to direct the Chairman, Pakistan Western Railways, Lahore, to re-open the number of the applicant and allow him to perform duty, granting, him all benefits of service and compensation arising thereof. The applicant has alleged that he was not allowed to perform duty on 9-2-68, and no action was taken on an applica--tion submitted by him on 26-2-1968, to the General Foreman in this connection.

Judgment Text

Court Name: Industrial Court Judge(s): Mushtaq Hussain Munir Title: ABDUR RAHMAN vs THE CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN WESTERN RAILWAY; LAHORE Case No.: Date of Judgment:1968-05-25 Reported As: 1970 PLC 369 Result: N/A Judgment AWARD This is an application by Abdul Rehman Fitter under sections 11 and 12 of the West Pakistan Indust8al Disputes Ordinance, 1968, .by which he has requested this Court; to direct the Chairman, Pakistan Western Railways, Lahore, to re-open the number of the applicant and allow him to perform duty, granting, him all benefits of service and compensation arising thereof. The applicant has alleged that he was not allowed to perform duty on 9-2-68, and no action was taken on an applica--tion submitted by him on 26-2-1968, to the General Foreman in this connection. He contends, that the dispute is in existence since 9-2-68 and as no written order was served upon him nor any allegation was made out; against him for stopping him from attending to duty, the order was unlawful and without autho--rity. As pointed out above, he has requested for the issue of a direction to the respondent to permit him to perform duty and grant him all benefits of service and. compensation arising therefrom. The respondent in his reply pointed out, that the petitioner had failed to specify any industrial dispute which was pending in this Court, and with which he was connected. It was asserted, that no such dispute was pending, It was thus submitted that the applicant had no locous, stands…

Read the full judgment on Al Wakeelo — Pakistan's AI-powered legal research platform.