1989 PLP 946 (PLC(CS))
MAQSOOD Versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SARGODHA and 2 others
| Citation | 1989 PLP 946 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MAQSOOD Versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SARGODHA and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1909)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 946 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1909)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 946 (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 946 (PLC(CS)) (MAQSOOD Versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SARGODHA and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- H.R. Haider for Appellant.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
- Muhammad Azam for Respondent No. 3.
- Date of hearing: 3rd April, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 25‑A, 36 & 38(,3)‑‑Labour Court deciding particular point without giving opportunity to petitioner to produce evidence‑‑Petitioner, held, prejudiced‑ Petitioner claiming for being considered for promotion‑‑No express plea about seniority taken in written statement‑‑Labour Court without affording opportunity of evidence dismissing grievance petition on ground that petitioner did not prove himself to be senior most‑‑Order of Labour Court, in circumstances, set aside in appeal and case remanded for re‑decision after opportunity of evidence to parties.
Judgment & Decree
H.R. Haider for Appellant. Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 and
2. Muhammad Azam for Respondent No.
3. Date of hearing: 3rd April, 1988. The appeal captioned above is directed against the decision dated 18‑2‑1988 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 5, Sargodha whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for being considered for promotion has been dismissed on the ground that he did not establish that he was the senior most.
2. The facts of the case arc that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 appointed respondent No. 3 namely Khalid Mahmood son of Mushtaq Ahmed as Sanitary Supervisor directly without considering the Sanitary Workers for promotion. The appellant bases his right on a settlement dated 10‑12‑1980 copy, of which is Exh. P.
2. The learned lower Court has accepted the settlement but the only ground as mentioned above is that the appellant did not prove himself as the senior most. In the written statements no express plea was taken about the seniority of the appellant. In these circumstances if the learned lower Court was particular to give decision on the point it should have afforded an opportunity to the appellant to produce evidence. Since this has not been done the appellant has been prejudiced.
3. As a result the appeal is accepted and setting aside the impugned decision, the case is remanded for re‑decision after inviting evidence from both the parties on the point of seniority. If the parties wish to produce any other evidence, it will be in the jurisdiction of the learned lower Court to consider the prayer. The parties are directed to appear before the learned lower Court on 13‑4‑1988. A.E./542/Lh P Appeal accepted.