IMDAD AHMED versus FACTORY MANAGER, NESTLE PRIVATE LIMITED, SHEIKHUPURA
Section 33 (10) Petition for Complaint Complaint Applicants / employees, whose services were terminated, filed a joint complaint, but the Labor Court asked them to withdraw their joint complaint request and have instead filed separate complaints. Order to be filed as each applicant is due to the applicant's independent action. And because applicants' dates of birth and service enrollment were different. The provisions of section 33 (10) of the Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010, require that workers with common complaints arising from a common cause of work can make joint application. The Labor Court object said provisions should be avoided in the process where multiple workers had the same or similar complaint. Such workers could maintain a joint complaint request instead of filing separate or individual complaint petitions. Workers who had a joint complaint or due to some action, but on the basis of a joint complaint request, the employee's request for a review of the Labor Court filing an unusual order was objected to on the basis that he Is not able to support it. The appropriate affidavit cannot be retained on such technical objection as it cannot merely review the irregular request, subject to the provisions of section 47 (5) of the Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010, the Labor Appellate Tribunal, Holds extensive and automatic powers to satisfy the accuracy, legality or ownership of any order, using its own jurisdiction. Revision to your jurisdiction through the Labor Court
Related judgments — Labour Appellant Tribunal Punjab, 2013
