1977 PLP 382(1) (PLC)
MOHAMMAD HANIF AND 2 OTHERS Versus MESSRS ASIF SILK FACTORY
| Citation | 1977 PLP 382(1) (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MOHAMMAD HANIF AND 2 OTHERS Versus MESSRS ASIF SILK FACTORY |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1977 PLP 382(1) (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 1977 PLP 382(1) (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1977 PLP 382(1) (PLC) (MOHAMMAD HANIF AND 2 OTHERS Versus MESSRS ASIF SILK FACTORY). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- All Ahmed for Appellants.
- Wasi Ahmed for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 25‑A‑Termination of services‑Workers concerned entering into a settlement with employer and recovering monetary reliefs as compensation for termination of their services‑Such workers cannot be permitted to resile from settlement duly implemented by them by receiving benefits.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑ S. 25‑A‑Termination of services‑Workers concerned entering into a settlement with employer and recovering monetary reliefs as compensation for termination of their services‑Such workers cannot be permitted to resile from settlement duly implemented by them by receiving benefits. All Ahmed for Appellants. Wasi Ahmed for Respondents. There are 3 appeals against the order of Labour Court dismissing the applications made by the appellants under section 25‑A of I. R. O, 1969. These appeals have been consolidated as common question is involved.
2. The three appellants were in service of the respondent. Their services were terminated. Aggrieved by this they approached the Labour Direc torate, Mr. Chughtai, the Conciliation Officer held the joint meeting wherein the parties entered into a settlement whereby the appellants were given certain monetary reliefs as compensation iii view of the termination of their services and, therefore, dispute came to the end. The appellants, however, subsequently approached the Labour Court under section 25‑A of I. R. O., 1969. The Labour Court dismissed the applications on the basis of settlement.' Aggrieved by this, the present appeals have been filed.
3. I have heard the representatives of the parties and I am of the opinion that no exception can be taken to the impugned order. The parties had rea ched a settlement and it is binding upon them. The appellants can not be permitted to resile from the settlement which was duly implemented by receiving the benefits.
4. In result the appeals are dismissed. Appeal dismissed.