Find a Lawyer

RUKHSANA BASHIR, TELEX OPERATOR, PTC, LAHORE versus DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, TELEX, LAHORE

Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Section 15 (1) (C) and 22A (8) (G) Return of Benefits In light of the decision of the Full Bench of the National Industrial Relations Commission, the employer charged with unfair labor practice returned two advance benefits. Before the applicant was further instructed in the incremental increments which could not be promoted on the basis of ES III, the training applicant challenged in his application that the application was completely based on false statements. 'S orders were approved and the entire bench applicant's orders were also illegally implemented. The petition unanimously requested that the order be the result of unfair labor practice. It was not the case of the applicant that she was a member / official of any trade union that worked for the employer or did not allege in her petition that action was taken against her. Because of its trade union activities, it was limited to the jurisdiction of the National Industrial Relations Commission. In cases where there was an inappropriate labor practice, it could not claim that it was discriminated against. Was targeted or fell prey to her trade union activities The applicant failed to deal with unfair wages. In practice the National Industrial Relations Commission had no jurisdiction to cope with its request. famous supreme court advocate from Sehwan lawyer