1988 PLP 462 (PLC)
MAQSOOD AHMAD and 5 others Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN JHANG and others
| Citation | 1988 PLP 462 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MAQSOOD AHMAD and 5 others Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN JHANG and others |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan, (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 462 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan, (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 462 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 462 (PLC) (MAQSOOD AHMAD and 5 others Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN JHANG and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.A. Javed for Appellants.
- Abdul Rab for Respondent (in Appeals Nos. 48 and 44 of 1986).
- Irshadullah Chattha for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 6th May, 1986.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Art.199‑‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss.25‑A, 36 & 38‑‑Decisions of Labour Courts and Appellate Tribunal in Punjab subject to writ jurisdiction of Lahore High Court‑‑Rulings of Lahore High Court, held, are to be followed even if views of Appellate Tribunal are different. Iqbal Muhammad Appellant in person (in Appeal No. 44 of 1986).
Judgment & Decree
M.A. Javed for Appellants. Iqbal Muhammad Appellant in person (in Appeal No. 44 of 1986). Abdul Rab for Respondent (in Appeals Nos. 48 and 44 of 1986). Irshadullah Chattha for Respondents. Date of hearing: 6th May, 1986. The six appeals captioned above arise from the decisions dated 18‑12‑1985, 14‑12‑1985, 14‑12‑1985, 14‑12‑1985, 14‑12‑1985 and 14‑12‑1985, respectively, recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.5, Faisalabad, whereby the grievance petitions of the appellants were returned for lack of jurisdiction relying upon 1985 P L C 1053 without expressing any opinion on the merits of the cases.
2. The learned lower Court has rightly relied upon the ruling cited above, inasmuch as the orders and decisions of the Labour Court and of this Tribunal are subject to writ jurisdiction of Lahore High Court, therefore, the rulings of the said Court are to be followed even if the personal view of this Tribunal may be different. The High Court has in the above cited ruling held that the bank employees who have been removed from service cease to remain workmen and that the Wage Commission Award not being an award as defined in the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 cannot be enforced through Labour Courts. The question no doubt is subjudice before the Supreme Court, but unless the abovementioned ruling is set aside, it is to be followed.
3. As a result of the observations made above, the appeals are dismissed, but it is directed that if the Supreme Court finds that the Labour Courts have jurisdiction, the appellants would be entitled to get their grievance petitions decided from the learned lower Court on merits. A. E. /110/Lb.S Appeals dismissed.