Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, LAHORE VS Respondent: LIAQAT ALI AND ANOTHER
Court Name: Industrial Appellate Tribunal Judge(s): Inamullah Khan Title: ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, LAHORE vs LIAQAT ALI AND ANOTHER Case No.: Appeal No. LHR-243 of 1969 Date of Judgment:1970-01-02 Reported As: 1970 PLC 266 Result: accordingly dismissed
Judgment ORDER This is an appeal against an order of the learned Chairman of the Labour Court (Central Zone), Lahore, dated 5th November 1969. The impugned order was passed on an application under section 15 (, C. P. C. for staying the operation of the order dated 21st October 1969, whereby Liaqat Ali, the respondent, was dismissed from service. The learned Chairman accepted the prayer. 2. The question is as to whether an appeal is maintainable against the impugned order. The order under appeal is, on the face of it, a preliminary order. Mr. Nasirul Hasan, the learned Representative for the Appellant contended that it is an interim award. Award is defined under section 2 (a), of the West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1968. It means the determination by an Industrial Court of any industrial dispute or any matter relating thereto, or any matter referred to it under clause (b) of subsection (1) of section 11, and includes an interim award. One thing is very clear from the definition of award that even for an interim award it must be the determination of some industrial dispute. The determination of a dispute implies finality. The learned Chairman had not finally disposed of the dispute between the parties. He has only stayed the operation of the order whereby the respondent was dismissed from service till the disposal of the main application under section 38, of the Ordinance. An appeal under section 16, of the Ordinance maintainable only against an award or a decision of the Court under section 26, or section 37, of the Ordinance. The impugned order cannot be said to be under section 26, or section 37, of the Ordinance. It is only an interim order during the pendency of the application under section 38 of the Ordinance. I would hold, in these circumstances, that no appeal lies. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.