1995 PLP 331 (PLC)
PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, KARACHI Versus KHURSHEED ALI
| Citation | 1995 PLP 331 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Ahmad Ali U. Quraishi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, KARACHI Versus KHURSHEED ALI |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Act, (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 331 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Act, (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 331 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Ahmad Ali U. Quraishi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 331 (PLC) (PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, KARACHI Versus KHURSHEED ALI). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ishaq Abbasi for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1989.
- 2. I have heard Mr. Ishaq Abbasi, learned Advocate for the appellants and respondent present in person and I have gene through the record and proceedings of the case.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 25‑A‑‑‑Grievance petition‑‑‑Industrial dispute‑‑‑Recovery‑‑‑Refund of amount deducted‑‑-Worker before Labour Court in his affidavit in evidence had averred that he was not given any opportunity to cross‑examine witnesses of employer in domestic inquiry‑‑‑Assertion of worker in that respect stood un-rebutted. and none appeared for employer before Labour Court during proceedings‑‑‑Labour Court treated inquiry proceedings to be unjust and unfair and set aside impugned order of dismissal of worker‑‑‑Order of Labour Court this called for no interference. Respondent in person.
Judgment & Decree
Ishaq Abbasi for Appellant. Respondent in person. Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1989. This is an appeal against the order of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No. VI at Hyderabad, dated 28‑8‑1986, under which the grievance petition, filed by the respondent was allowed and refund of deducted amount was ordered to be made to the respondent.
2. I have heard Mr. Ishaq Abbasi, learned Advocate for the appellants and respondent present in person and I have gene through the record and proceedings of the case.
3. The respondent before the learned Labour Court in his Affidavit‑in -Evidence had averred that he was not given any opportunity to cross‑examine the witnesses of the appellants in the domestic enquiry. His assertion in this respect stands un-rebutted as none appeared for the appellants before the Labour Court, when the case proceeded. Even the enquiry papers were not produced before the Labour Court to rebut the assertion of appellants. The learned Labour Court, therefore, held the enquiry proceedings to be unjust and unfair and set aside the impugned order of the dismissal of the respondent. Under the circumstances, the immaterial order appears to be correct and requires no interference in the appeal, which is dismissed. M.Y.H./1606/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.