1991 PLP 636 (PLC(CS))
S. MUHAMMAD DIN TENNERIES LABOUR UNION Versus REGISTRAR TRADE UNION
| Citation | 1991 PLP 636 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | S. MUHAMMAD DIN TENNERIES LABOUR UNION Versus REGISTRAR TRADE UNION |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 636 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 636 (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 636 (PLC(CS)) (S. MUHAMMAD DIN TENNERIES LABOUR UNION Versus REGISTRAR TRADE UNION). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 15th October, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.25‑A‑‑‑Revision against observation in an interlocutory order‑‑‑Held, orders or observations in an interlocutory order, were of tentative nature and not final orders‑‑‑Final orders would be passed on basis of evidence and admission of parties before Presiding Officer on merits unprejudiced by said observations. S.P. Lodhi, Representative for the Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
S.P. Lodhi, Representative for the Applicant. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 15th October, 1989. The only grievance is about the observation of the learned Presiding Officer Labour Court which is as under:-- "The Labour Officer Mr. Ghulam Qadir in his arguments submits that at present no union is registered as such certificates is not issued to any of the contesting parties and the certificate is the part of Registration. According to him the union is not registered and such entry is not made in Register. He further submits that at present the above union is not registered." It is submitted by Mr. S.P. Lodhi that in reply to the appeal filed by the applicant the Registrar has stated that the union has been registered. He contends that aforementioned observation of the learned Presiding Officer would adversely affect his appeal. The orders or observations in an interlocutory order are always of tentative nature and are not final orders. The final orders would be passed on the basis of the evidence and admissions of the parties before the learned Presiding officer on merits unprejudiced by above observation. With this observation the Revision Application is dismissed in limine. M.Y.H./1560/Lb.S Application dismissed.