Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: EMPLOYEES UNION And Other VS Respondent: PAKISTAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, KARACHI
Court Name: Labour Appellate Tribunal Judge(s): Inamullah Khan Title:EMPLOYEES UNION And Other vs PAKISTAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION,
KARACHI Case No.:Appeals Nos. KAR-703, 705, 716, 719, 722, 754, 761, 789, 815, 820 to 823, 826, 830, 855, 856, 873 to 888, 890 to 936, 950, 951, 957, 962 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-703 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-703 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-705 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-705 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-716 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-719 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-722 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-722 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-754 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-761 of 1973 Appeal No. KAR-815 of 1973 Appeals Nos. KAR-820 to 823 of 1973 Appeals Nos. KAR-820 t Date of Judgment:1974-03-28 Reported As: 1975 PLC 108 Result: Writ Petition No. 599 of 1973 Judgment DECISION I propose to dispose of these appeals by a common order, in view of the decision of the High Court of Sind and Baluchistan in , Muhammad Aqil v. Chairman, Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal and Pakistan Paper Products Limited, in which it has been held that an order under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (hereinafter called the Ordinance), is not an award and, therefore, no appeal lies. All these appeals are against orders under section 34 of the Ordinance. I, therefore, dismiss them as no appeals lies. 2. It may be noted that in Appeals Nos. KAR-703/73, KAR-722/73, KAR-826/73, KAR-830/73, KAR-855/73, KAR-950/73, KAR-951/73, KAR-72/74, KAR-53/74, and KAR-85/74, there is an additional ground also for dismissal on the ground of non- prosecution; the appellants are absent, in spite of service. After I had passed the above order, Mr. Ijaz Rizvi, for the appellant in Appeal No. KAR-8/3/73, appeared and stated that the application of the respondent was not only under section 34 of the Ordinance, but it was also under section 25-A of the Ordinance and, therefore, an appeal lies. The admitted position is that the application is in both the sections. A decision under section 25-A of the Ordinance is an award. Therefore, an appeal lies. In these circumstances, I withdraw my order of dismissal in Appeal No. KAR-873/73. The
---
## Page 2
appeal, I am told, is fixed for 30th April 1974. It is too long a date. I will pre-date it and fix 12th April 1974, for final decision. The learned Advocates accept this date.