Find a Lawyer

INTIZAR AHMED versus MCB AND OTHERS

Section 22A (8) (g) and 22D Employment from unfair labor practice by the Appellant's Full Bench of the National Industrial Relations Commission by the Employer to the applicant on a charge sheet and absent from the duty member. He was removed from the job after investigating the allegations. In a single bench dismissing the applicant's complaint against NIRC employees against the removal order, he filed an appeal before the National Industrial Relations Commission's Full Bench under Section 22D of the Industrial Relations Ordinance. Was allegedly questioned against the appellant under allegations that he was absent from duty due to alleged trade union activity because of unfair labor practice and the appellant's requests during the investigation. Was heard and approved, but nevertheless, the appellant did not comply with it and without Present yourself to the process of inquiry justification. The complaint was filed only three months after his dismissal, when he was not an employee or employee of the management. The alleged practice proceedings were initiated. After taking notice or inquiry proceedings, the appellant should have moved the labor court's complaint to the Commission's Single Bench, which did not qualify itself, in which case neither the appellant Single's trade union activities There was no evidence of victimization and no evidence of discrimination. The Commission's bench, in the circumstances, was wrong advocates from Larkana lawyer