1995 PLP 479 (PLC)
DISTRICT MANAGER, KARACHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KARACHI. Versus AMIR AFZAL and others
| Citation | 1995 PLP 479 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | DISTRICT MANAGER, KARACHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KARACHI. Versus AMIR AFZAL and others |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 479 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 479 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 479 (PLC) (DISTRICT MANAGER, KARACHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KARACHI. Versus AMIR AFZAL and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Date of hearing: 14th March, 1995.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 38(3‑a)‑‑‑Revision‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Employees working as conductors in Corporation were promoted as Traffic Assistants and after they officiated for about seven years, according to settlement, were confirmed‑‑‑Employees even after their confirmation as Traffic Assistants, were all of a sudden, reverted as conductors without any intimation or show‑cause notice‑‑‑On filing grievance petition against said reversion, Labour Court stayed order of reversion pending proceedings‑‑‑Corporation which filed revision petition against interim order passed by labour Court according to which operation of reversion order was stayed, had not been able to show, as to how order staying revision was illegal or otherwise defective‑‑‑Revision petition against interim stay order of Labour Court which was not final order, was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed. Azmatullah Khan, Representative for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 38(3‑a)‑‑‑Revision‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Employees working as conductors in Corporation were promoted as Traffic Assistants and after they officiated for about seven years, according to settlement, were confirmed‑‑‑Employees even after their confirmation as Traffic Assistants, were all of a sudden, reverted as conductors without any intimation or show‑cause notice‑‑‑On filing grievance petition against said reversion, Labour Court stayed order of reversion pending proceedings‑‑‑Corporation which filed revision petition against interim order passed by labour Court according to which operation of reversion order was stayed, had not been able to show, as to how order staying revision was illegal or otherwise defective‑‑‑Revision petition against interim stay order of Labour Court which was not final order, was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed. Azmatullah Khan, Representative for Applicant. Date of hearing: 14th March, 1995. These three respondents were working as conductors in the Karachi Transport Corporation. They were promoted as Traffic Assistants. After they officiated for about 7 years, according to the settlement, they were confirmed. Then all of a sudden they were again reverted as conductors without any intimation or show‑cause notice. They filed grievance petition before the Labour Court No.
1. The Labour Court stayed the order of reversion, pending the proceedings. The Karachi Transport Corporation have then filed these Revision Applications against interim order staying the operation of reversion order by the K.T.C. The learned counsel for the applicants K.T.C. has not been able to show how this order staying reversion is illegal or otherwise defective.
2. I accordingly find that no Revision lies against this order which is not final. These Revision Applications are therefore dismissed in limine. H.B.T./2440/Lb.S Revision dismissed.