1988 PLP 376 (PLC)
MUHAMMAD FAROOQ TEXTILE MILLS LTD., KARACHI Versus MUHAMMAD KHAQAN
| Citation | 1988 PLP 376 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind |
| Bench Members | Ali Nawaz Budhani, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD FAROOQ TEXTILE MILLS LTD., KARACHI Versus MUHAMMAD KHAQAN |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 376 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 376 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind bench comprising: Ali Nawaz Budhani, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 376 (PLC) (MUHAMMAD FAROOQ TEXTILE MILLS LTD., KARACHI Versus MUHAMMAD KHAQAN). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Shafiq Qureshifor Respondent.
- 3. I have heard Mr.Siddiq Mirza, the learned Advocate for the applicant mills and Mr. Shafiq Qureshi, the learned counsel on behalf of the respondent workmen and have also perused the record and proceedings of the case. It is an admitted position that the respondent, being aggrieved by the earlier order dated 13‑3‑1986 of the learned Labour Court had already filed an appeal before this Tribunal which is still pending disposal. Therefore, I am of the view that since the appeal of the respondent, namely Muhammad Khaqan against Muhammad Farooq Textile Mills Ltd. (the applicants herein) under section 37 (3) of I.R.O. 1969, is pending, so, the present revision application is besides the point and has become infructuous. Hence, the present revision application is accordingly dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
Siddiq Mirza for Applicant. Shafiq Qureshifor Respondent. Date of hearing: 3rd August, 1987. This is a suo motu revision application under section 38(3‑a) of I.R.O. 1969, filed by the applicant mills against an impugned order, dated 9‑12‑1986, passed by the Sind Labour Court No.IV, Karachi, who had dismissed the legal objections of the applicant mills.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the application under section 25‑A, I.R.O. 1969 filed by the respondent before the learned Labour Court was barred as 'res judicata' under sections 10 and 11, C.P. C. on the ground that an application under section 25‑A was filed before the IInd Sind Labour Court and it, by order, dated 13‑3‑1986, reinstated him for the reason of his being an office‑bearer of a union whose registration was pending, thus a violation of section 8‑A of the I.R.O. 1969 was alleged against the employer. The case of the applicant mills was further that the respondent, in this application, had challenged his dismissal besides the plea of violation of section 8‑A and both the issues were already decided by the learned Labour Court, therefore, these issues cannot be reagitated in the present application under section 25‑A, I.R.O. 1969. Hence, the application was barred by the principle of 'res judicata'. However, the respondent workman resisted the legal objections of the applicant mills and thereafter, the learned Labour Court has passed the impugned order, hence, the present suo motu revision application.
3. I have heard Mr.Siddiq Mirza, the learned Advocate for the applicant mills and Mr. Shafiq Qureshi, the learned counsel on behalf of the respondent workmen and have also perused the record and proceedings of the case. It is an admitted position that the respondent, being aggrieved by the earlier order dated 13‑3‑1986 of the learned Labour Court had already filed an appeal before this Tribunal which is still pending disposal. Therefore, I am of the view that since the appeal of the respondent, namely Muhammad Khaqan against Muhammad Farooq Textile Mills Ltd. (the applicants herein) under section 37 (3) of I.R.O. 1969, is pending, so, the present revision application is besides the point and has become infructuous. Hence, the present revision application is accordingly dismissed. A. E. /1097/Lb.S Application dismissed