1996 PLP 942 (SCMR)
PAKISTAN T&T ALL STAFF UNION and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus N. I.R.C. and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1996 PLP 942 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sajjad Ali Shah, C.J., Zia Mahmood Mirza and |
| Parties | PAKISTAN T&T ALL STAFF UNION and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus N. I.R.C. and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 942 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 PLP 942 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sajjad Ali Shah, C.J., Zia Mahmood Mirza and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 942 (SCMR) (PAKISTAN T&T ALL STAFF UNION and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus N. I.R.C. and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ‑‑‑‑S. 22‑A(g)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑High Court had remanded case to National Industrial Relations Commission for decision of appeal on merits after deciding question of locus standi of representative Trade Union, (appellant) providing him opportunity to show as to how he could represent the Union‑‑‑Order of remand had not been complied with‑‑‑Counsel representing parties had consented to consent order of Supreme Court whereby Full Bench of three Members of National Industrial Relations Commission would hear matter in question in terms of order of remand passed by High Court‑‑‑Date of hearing before the Commission had been fixed‑‑‑National Industrial Relations Commission was directed that question of locus standi would be determined finally regardless of the fact whether representative of union appears or not, at the time of hearing and case was to be disposed of as per remand order and would not be dismissed for non -prosecution‑‑‑Case could be heard on day to day basis till the matter was finally disposed of.
- Musheer Pesh Imam and Malik M. Asghar, Advocates Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Appellant (in C.As. Nos. 335 and 336 of 1993).
- Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court and. Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant (in C.As. Nos. 337 and 338 of 1993).
- Imtiaz M. Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. l (in C.As. Nos. 337‑338 of 1993).
- Musheer Pesh Imam and Malik M. Asghar, Advocates Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant (in C.As. Nos. 335 and 336 of 1993).
- Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court and. Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.As. Nos. 337 and 338 of 1993).
- Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for the Respondent T&T Department.
- Imtiaz M. Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No. l (in C.As. Nos. 337-338 of 1993).
Headnotes / Summary
Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for the Respondent T&T Department.
Judgment & Decree
Musheer Pesh Imam and Malik M. Asghar, Advocates Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant (in C.As. Nos. 335 and 336 of 1993). Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court and. Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.As. Nos. 337 and 338 of 1993). Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for the Respondent T&T Department. Imtiaz M. Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No. l (in C.As. Nos. 337-338 of 1993). It appears from the record that an order dated 7-3-1989 in C.P.D 350/83 was passed by the High Court remanding the case to N.I.R.C. for decision of the appeal on merits after deciding the question of locus standi of Mr. N.A. Baqi Khan providing him opportunity to show as to how he could represent a union, by producing evidence. The other side was also directed to rebut such evidence if so wished. The order of remand has not been complied with and after that on two occassions the appeal has been dismissed for non prosecution on account of failure of Mr. M.A. Baqi Khari to put in his the time of hearing. Grievance is made before us that with the referendum has not been held for last about 15 appearing in these appeals have consented to the Full Bench of three members of N.I.R.C. shall hear the matter in terms of the order of remand dated 7-3-1989 passed by the High Court as mentioned above. For that purpose the date of hearing before N.I.R.C. is fixed as 4-1-1995. It is directed that question of locus standi shall be determined finally regardless of the fact that whether Mr. Baqi Khan appears or not, represented or not at the time of hearing. It is expected that the matter is to be disposed of as per remand order and shall not be dismissed for non-prosecution. If need be the hearing shall be taken in hand day to day till the matter is finally disposed of." The appeals stand disposed of in the terms indicated above. A.A./P-252/S Order accordingly.