1996 PLP 502 (PLC)
G.L. LEE, PERSONNEL MANAGER Versus ASMATULLAH
| Citation | 1996 PLP 502 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | National Industrial Relations Commission |
| Bench Members | Gohar Yaqoob Yousafzai, Member |
| Parties | G.L. LEE, PERSONNEL MANAGER Versus ASMATULLAH |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 502 (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 1996 PLP 502 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the National Industrial Relations Commission bench comprising: Gohar Yaqoob Yousafzai, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 502 (PLC) (G.L. LEE, PERSONNEL MANAGER Versus ASMATULLAH). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 16 & 53
National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973, Regln. 32(1)
Unfair labour practice by employees
Accused/employees despite service of notice, intentionally avoided appearance before National Industrial Relations Commission and continued with their illegal and uncalled for activities against complainants/employers-- Accused/employees having decided to frustrate the process of National Industrial Relations Commission by not appearing before it, the Commission relying upon affidavit of complainants/employers passed order in accordance with provisions of Regln. 32(1) of National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973
Accused/employees were held guilty of offences as alleged against them and were punished under S. 53 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Tanvir Bashir Ansari for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Case No. 4(15) of 1995, decided on 7th December, 1995. ‑‑‑‑Ss. 16 & 53‑‑‑National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973, Regln. 32(1)‑‑‑Unfair labour practice by employees‑‑‑Accused/employees despite service of notice, intentionally avoided appearance before National Industrial Relations Commission and continued with their illegal and uncalled for activities against complainants/employers‑‑ Accused/employees having decided to frustrate the process of National Industrial Relations Commission by not appearing before it, the Commission relying upon affidavit of complainants/employers passed order in accordance with provisions of Regln. 32(1) of National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973‑‑‑Accused/employees were held guilty of offences as alleged against them and were punished under S. 53 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Tanvir Bashir Ansari for the Complainant. Nemo for Respondents. The learned counsel for the complainant is present alongwith the complainant. The record of the case reveals that on various occasions the respondents/accused were served with notice, but they have intentionally avoided appearance before this Commission and resultantly, are still continued with their illegal and uncalled for actions against the management i.e. the complainant. It seems that they have decided to frustrate the process of this Commission, as well by not appearing before' this Court. There is no other option with this Commission but to rely upon the affidavit of the complainant and to pass an order in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 32(1) of the N.I.R.C. (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973. In such view of 'nine matter it is held that the respondents/accused are guilty of the offences as claimed against them, under the provisions of section 16 of the I.R.O., 1969 for which the punishment is provided under section 53 of the I.R.O., 1969. Therefore, the respondents/accused whose names are mentioned in para. No.7 of the complaint and the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 who are legal representative of the C.B.A., are fined with the sum of Rs.1,000 each. The file be consigned to record after completion of the necessary formalities. H.B.T./260/NIRC Order accordingly.