1978 PLP 273 (PLC)

S. 25‑A read with Labour Laws (Amendment) Ordinance (XXVI of 1975)‑Abolition of Junior Labour Court‑Transfer of pending cases‑Petition dismissed for default by Junior Labour Court Application for restoration filed before Junior Labour Court prior to promulgation of Labour Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 1975‑order passed by Junior Labour Court after promulgation of Ordinance of 1975‑Such order, held, a nullity in law‑Application for restoration, held further, deemed to be pending before Labour Court having territorial jurisdiction. Nazir Ahmad Naz for Appellant. Imtiaz Ahmad for Respondent. Date of hearing: 23rd June 1976. This is an appeal against the decision dated, 13‑4‑1976 of Punjab Labour Court, No. 4, Multan given under section 25‑A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. 2. Mohammad Qasim, appellant an employee of Abbasi Textile Mills, Limited. Rahim Yar Khan, respondent, was dismissed from service. He challenged the order of his dismissal by way of a petition under section 25‑A of the Ordinance before the Junior Labour Court. Since on the date of hearing the appellant did not appear, his petition was dismissed in default by the Junior Labour Court ride order dated 24th October. 1975. Thereafter as application was filed before the Junior Labour Court for the setting aside of the ex parts order. The Junior Labour Court ride its order dated 30‑t‑1976 restored the original petition. According to the Labour Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 1975, the Junior Labour Courts were abolished on 16‑1‑1976 and the petitions pending there were automatically transferred to the Senior Labour Courts for adjudication. Since the order of restoring the original petition by the Junior Labour Court was passed after 16‑1‑19760 it is nullity in law as it was passed without jurisdiction. In other words that order does not exist. The respondent, thereafter, went up in appeal before the Labour Court, No. 4, challenging the order of restoration. The learned Labour Court dismissed the appeal as being incompetent because it had no jurisdiction to hear the appeals against the decision of the Junior Labour Court after 16‑1‑1976. The learned Labour Court also ride order dated 13‑4‑1976 gave a decision on Petition No. 42/76 to the effect that the case was no longer deemed to be pending as it had been finally disposed of by the Junior Labour Court on 24‑10‑1975. 3. Aggrieved by the above decision, the' appellant has preferred this appeal. 4. As already mentioned above, when the application for setting aside the appellant order of the Junior Labour Court dated 24‑10‑1975 was filed, the Junior Labour Court was still in existence. It was only the decision on that application was nullity in law because it wet passed by the Junior Labour Court when it was no longer in existence. Therefore, the application for restoration is still deemed to be pending before the Punjab Labour Court No. 4, for adjudication. 5. I, accordingly, accept the appeal, set aside the decision of the learned Labour Court and remand the case back for decision on merits on the application for restoration of the original petition in accordance with law.