1983 PLP 878 (PLC(CS))
PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD Versus MUHAMMAD YOUNIS.
| Citation | 1983 PLP 878 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD Versus MUHAMMAD YOUNIS. |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 PLP 878 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 PLP 878 (PLC(CS))?
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: 1983 PLP 878 (PLC(CS)) (PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD Versus MUHAMMAD YOUNIS.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aftab Ahmad for Appellant.
- Nazir Ahmad Naz for Respondent.
- Date of hearing :19th February, 1983:
Headnotes / Summary
S. 37‑Appeal before Appellate Tribunal‑‑Appeal filed and presented by Law Officer of Road Transport Board‑‑ No power of attorney or letter of authority authorising hire to present appeal produced‑Appeal. in circumstances, dismissed, as incompetent.
Judgment & Decree
This appeal arises from the decision dated 5‑1‑1981 passed. by the learned Presiding Officer, ‑ Punjab Labour Court No. 5, Faisalabad, whereby the respondent was directed to be ire‑instated in service with back benefits.
2. The respondent was a clerk. On the ground of becoming ‑ surplus his services were terminated on 13‑3‑1980. On behalf of the respondent cross‑objections have been wanted to the effect that the appeal was not properly presented as in favour of Mr. Shafiq Ahmad there is no power of attorney on the record executed by the appellant.
3. The plea of the respondent was that the persons entered at Nos. 12 to 16 in the seniority list had been transferred on their own request and thus, according to the rules, they became junior to him. No evidence was produced that the said persons were transferred to the depot of the respondent on their own request.
4. However, the cross‑objections have not been successfully met by the appellant. The first order dated 2‑2‑1981 shows that the appeal was presented by Mr. Shafiq Ahmad, Law Officer. No power of attorney or letter of authority has been placed on the record to show that Mr. Shafiq Ahmad had been duly authorised by the appellant to present the appeal. On 2‑3‑1981 Mr. Said Ahmad, Court Clerk, and on 6‑4‑1981 again Mr. Shafiq Ahmad appeared. There is no letter of authority authorising Mr. Said Ahmad, Court Clerk, to appear in the appeal. The appeal had become time barred on 8‑2‑1981. Since till then no authorised person or agent appeared,) the appeal had become time‑barred. Even thereafter, no authorised counsel appeared Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Khokhar had been appearing but even in his favour there is no power of attorney on the record. The cross‑objections were filed on 5‑4‑1981 but in spite‑of the objection‑no power of attorney was brought on the record, which could show that before the period of limitation expired, some authorised person had appeared The appeal, therefore was incompetent and also tune‑barred and is dismissed for these reasons. Appeal dismissed.