Al Wakeelo logo

Al Wakeelo

Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty

Initializing Secure Chambers

1999 PLC 413

ARSHAD ALI vs SINDH LABOUR COURT NO.II and 3 others

Petitioner: ARSHAD ALI VS Respondent: SINDH LABOUR COURT NO.II and 3 others

Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Decision Date: 1999-02-01

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

Court Name: Labour Appellate Tribunal Judge(s): Tanzil-ur-Rehman Title: ARSHAD ALI vs SINDH LABOUR COURT NO.II and 3 others Case No.: Revision Application No,KAR-390 of 1998 Date of Judgment:1999-02-01 Reported As: 1999 PLC 413 Result: Revision dismissed.

JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT ' This is a revision application under suo motu power of the Court vested under section 38(3-a) of I.R.0 1969 which was presented on 19th December, 1998. 2. I have perused the order, dated 24-8-1998 impugned in the present revision. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was ' a workman with respondent No,4. His services were orally terminated on 28-4-1997 in retaliation to the formation of trade union. He gave grievance notice to respondent No,4. Having received no reply he filed grievance application under section 25-A, of the I.R.O. 1969, thereafter, he also filed a complaint under section 51(1) of I.R.O., 1969 before the Labour Court. A formal charge was framed against respondents Nos.2, 3 and 4 in May, 1997. Mr. Rafiullah stated at the bar that there were no further proceedings in the application under section 51(1), I.R.O. 1969 after framing of the charge. About a year after on 21st May, 1998 an application was moved by the respondent under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. which is still pending. The learned Labour Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties passed an order whereby he stopped the hearing of application under section 249-A as well as complaint and ordered to proceed with the application under section 25-A of I.R.O., 1969. 4. I have thoughtfully considered the impugned order and I find no infirmity, incorrectness or illegality or impropriety in the order impugned before me and as such the Revision Application is dismissed in limine. ' Announced in open Court the 1st day of February, 1999.

Related Legal Research & Directories