1990 PLP 849 (SCMR)
Multan‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, PUNJAB LABOUR COURT No.9,
| Citation | 1990 PLP 849 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ----S. 15--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25‑A‑‑‑Fixation/ entitlement of pay‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether jurisdiction with regard to fixation/entitlement of pay under Pay Revision Rules, was a matter exclusively for the Labour Court to determine and not for Authority under the Payment of Wages Act‑‑‑Leave to appeal was, however, subject to question of limitation arising in some of the petition.‑‑ Jurisdiction. |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | Multan‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, PUNJAB LABOUR COURT No.9, |
| Primary Law | Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 849 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 849 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ----S. 15--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25‑A‑‑‑Fixation/ entitlement of pay‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether jurisdiction with regard to fixation/entitlement of pay under Pay Revision Rules, was a matter exclusively for the Labour Court to determine and not for Authority under the Payment of Wages Act‑‑‑Leave to appeal was, however, subject to question of limitation arising in some of the petition.‑‑ Jurisdiction. bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 849 (SCMR) (Multan‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, PUNJAB LABOUR COURT No.9,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Fazl‑e‑Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in all Petitions).
- Nemo for Respondents (in all Petitions).
- Date of hearing: 23rd July, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 15--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25‑A‑‑‑Fixation/ entitlement of pay‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether jurisdiction with regard to fixation/entitlement of pay under Pay Revision Rules, was a matter exclusively for the Labour Court to determine and not for Authority under the Payment of Wages Act‑‑‑Leave to appeal was, however, subject to question of limitation arising in some of the petition.‑‑ [Jurisdiction].
Judgment & Decree
versus MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and 30 others‑‑Respondents (From the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, dated 4‑3‑1985 passed in Writ Petitions Nos.1332 to 1362 of 1984). Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 621 to 651 and 564 to 569 of 1985, decided on 23rd July, 1989.
S. 15--Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25‑A‑‑‑Fixation/ entitlement of pay‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether jurisdiction with regard to fixation/entitlement of pay under Pay Revision Rules, was a matter exclusively for the Labour Court to determine and not for Authority under the Payment of Wages Act‑‑‑Leave to appeal was, however, subject to question of limitation arising in some of the petition.‑‑ [Jurisdiction]. Ch. Fazl‑e‑Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in all Petitions). Nemo for Respondents (in all Petitions). Date of hearing: 23rd July, 1989. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑‑Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the jurisdiction with regard to fixation/entitlement of Pay under Pay Revision Rules is a matter exclusively for the Labour Court to determine and not for Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, and relies on leave granting order dated 13‑8‑1988 in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.705 of 1983. (The Divisional Superintendent, Pakistan Railways, Multan v. Sardar Muhammad and 39 others). 2. Leave is granted in all these Petitions subject to question of limitation arising in some of them. To be heard alongwith C.P.L.A.‑ No.705 of 1983 on present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents. AA./P‑119/S Leave granted.