Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YAQUB versus PAKISTAN PETROLEUM

Service Tribunals Act 1973 Section 2A [As has been entered in the Service Tribunals (Amendment) Act (XVII of 1997]] Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Section 25A Employee of a government-controlled organization complains to the Labor Court Filed an application pending until 1997. While the aforementioned application takes into consideration the pending decision before entering the Labor Tribunal Section 2A in the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, it has been stated that employees reserve their right to file an appeal before the Service Tribunal in view of Section 2A. Moved the request before the Labor Court to withdraw their complaint with. The Labor Tribunal of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, dismissed the employees' complaints on 1 1 1998. The employee filed an appeal before the Labor Appellate Tribunal against the Labor Court's order, which the employee subsequently dismissed. Before the service tribunal was dismissed with a time limit of 17 10 1998 either the appellant should apply Ave within 90 days of 10 6 199fi when section 2A was added to the service tribunals act 1973 Or in the case of Muhammad Afzal v. Karachi Electric Supply Corporation 1999 SCMR, the maximum period of 90 days of the Supreme Court decision was included. 92 which was valid in the history of 31 3 1998. In the observations of the service tribunal there is no doubt that in view of the weighty and generally such observations, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Muhammad Afzal v. Karachi Electric Supply Corporation. The delay was not a matter of condolences. In January 1999, such a service tribunal published a SCMR, administered by a state court, top civil advocates from Chak Jamal lawyer