Find a Lawyer

TAJ MUHAMMAD versus SIEMENS PAKISTAN

Section 25A, 37 (3) and 38 of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VII of 1968), Section Oz 12 (3) and 15 to appeal to the Labor Appellate Tribunal for a service dismissal complaint. The claim has been made. Permanent Employee, alleging that he was dismissed from employment without notice or inquiry, is against the Standing Orders 12 (3) and 15 of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968. And a full recovery has been claimed. Return on terms of appointment, appellant's extension of service and evidence on record show that the appellant was appointed for a particular job on the relevant project and was told that according to the terms of his appointment Appellant's services were terminated. Any show cause is available for the issuance of a notice or inquiry where the nature of the job was in relation to a particular job or project and the employee's services. Such project was canceled upon completion of such project, the duration of the service was not relevant The Labor Court's impugned order did not face any legal or factual weakness because of any qualification by the employees. Appeal filed with has been dismissed. patent advocate from Miran Shah lawyer