1996 PLP 55 (PLC)
ISHAQUE ALI Versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, SECOND SINDH
| Citation | 1996 PLP 55 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | ISHAQUE ALI Versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, SECOND SINDH |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 55 (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 55 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 55 (PLC) (ISHAQUE ALI Versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, SECOND SINDH). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ----S. 25-A---Grievance petition---Grievance petition filed by employee was dismissed by Court for non-appearance of employee and his representative on date of hearing---No evidence was produced to prove that absence of employee or his representative was due to any mistake with regard to date of hearing-- Court also found that no interest was shown by employee in his case and even copies of documents which were to be filed by employee had not been obtained by him---No sufficient cause having been established by employee for setting aside order of dismissal of grievance petition passed by Court below, his application for setting aside dismissal order was dismissed in circumstances.
- Gohar Iqbal, Representative for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 9th August, 1995.
Headnotes / Summary
Zafar Farooqui, Representative for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 25‑A‑‑‑Grievance petition‑‑‑Grievance petition filed by employee was dismissed by Court for non‑appearance of employee and his representative on date of hearing‑‑‑No evidence was produced to prove that absence of employee or his representative was due to any mistake with regard to date of hearing‑‑ Court also found that no interest was shown by employee in his case and even copies of documents which were to be filed by employee had not been obtained by him‑‑‑No sufficient cause having been established by employee for setting aside order of dismissal of grievance petition passed by Court below, his application for setting aside dismissal order was dismissed in circumstances. Zafar Farooqui, Representative for Applicant. Gohar Iqbal, Representative for Respondents. Date of hearing: 9th August, 1995. DECISION This appeal arises from the order of the Labour Court No. II. Karachi dismissing the petition under section 25‑A for non‑appearance of the representative and the party on the date of hearing. The hearing was fixed on 25‑5‑1994 and the applicant and his representative were called absent. On 29‑5‑1994 the representative filed application for restoration. It was the case of the applicant's representative that the applicant who had attended the Court on the previous hearing mistakenly recorded next date to be 28‑5‑1995 when the actual date fixed was 25‑5‑1994.
2. No evidence has been produced that the absence of the party and the representative was due to mistake, the fact regarding date of hearing. Even the diary of the representative has not been submitted to show that the hearing was recorded in the diary as 28‑5‑1994. The Labour Court also found that no interest has been shown by the applicant in this case and even the copies of documents to be filed had not been obtained by the applicant. I accordingly find that no sufficient cause has been established for setting aside the order of dismissal passed by the Trial Court. This application is therefore dismissed. H.B.T./2500/Lb.S Application dismissed.