1998 PLP 389 (PLC)
Messrs BAWANY SUGAR MILLS LTD Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others
| Citation | 1998 PLP 389 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | Messrs BAWANY SUGAR MILLS LTD Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others |
| Primary Law | Industrial dispute |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 389 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial dispute as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 389 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 389 (PLC) (Messrs BAWANY SUGAR MILLS LTD Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 22nd December, 1996.
Headnotes / Summary
Practice and procedure-- -Re-hearing of decided matter
Pending Constitutional petition against final decision of Labour Appellate Tribunal, employers/appellants filed application before Labour Appellate Tribunal for rehearing the matter
No provision in Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 being available for re-hearing a decided matter specially when matter was sub judice before High Court application for re-hearing the matter was not maintainable.
Judgment & Decree
Application in Appeals Nos. HYD493 of 1996, HYD-494 of 1996, YD495 of 1996, HYD-496 of 1996, HYD-497 of 1996, HYD-498 of 1996 and Appeal No. HYD-503 of 1996, decided on 22nd December, 1996.
Practice and procedure-- -Re-hearing of decided matter
Pending Constitutional petition against final decision of Labour Appellate Tribunal, employers/appellants filed application before Labour Appellate Tribunal for rehearing the matter
No provision in Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 being available for re-hearing a decided matter specially when matter was sub judice before High Court application for re-hearing the matter was not maintainable. Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for Appellant. Date of hearing: 22nd December, 1996. These are five connected applications for re-hearing. There were in all seven appeals of similar nature by Bawany Sugar Mills against their worker. Two of the workers were served while the remaining five workers could not be served personally for want of detailed address. Service was, therefore, ordered by publication. The notice was published in Urdu daily Qaumi Akhbar Publication from Karachi. The matter was then heard and disposed of. A Constitutional petition against the decision is said to have been preferred before the Hon'ble High Court of Sindh and the matter is said to be pending and has not so far been heard in that Court. During the pendency of the petition, this application has again been filed before the Labour Appellate Tribunal for re-hearing. There is no revision in the I.R.O. for re-hearing a decided matter, specially when the matter is now subjudice before the High Court.
2. This application for re-hearing is, therefore, dismissed in limine. H.B.T./238/Lb.S Application dismissed.