Find a Lawyer

BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, FAISALABAD versus THE PRESIDING OFFICER, PUNJAB LABOUR COURT

Section 255A & 38 (3) (a) Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), AXXX, Array 1 & 2 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Request for Employment Retirement Request Job Reinstatement Employed by the Labor Court In the case of a temporary injunction in the case of allowing / suspending, it was stated that restoration of the order was the main relief for the restoration of the service, which could not be obtained by interim order, the Labor Court itself. This question was observed, whether the employee was an employee or not. A decision cannot be made without a recording of the evidence before the Labor Court without knowing that it does not have jurisdiction so it cannot be extended to any interim relief, in the absence of a determination of the jurisdictional question, It cannot be said that the employee was an employee in the primary case; if he succeeds, he will be entitled to a salary for that period; he will lose the job, but if he fails, it will be fine for the employer. Will not be able to recover it. Salaries generated by employees, as they continued to serve under an interim order, the balance of the facility was in favor of the employer. The unpaid order was expressly arbitrary and additional jurisdiction was obtained in the Labor Court, The matter can be modified by the employees. Section 38 (3) (a) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, was a reasonable alternative; it had no qualification as the High Court accepted the constitutional petition while invalid. Declared the order without legal authority and consequently had no legal effect for which the employee filed Seven diseases top advocates from Karak lawyer