PRESIDENT UNITED BANK LIMITED versus MST. SHAMAILA USMAN
Article 47 (4) (11) and (12) of the Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Law Decision of the Legal Period The Labor Appellate Tribunal suspended the labor court's decision in favor of the purpose, purpose and scope of labor. But the suspension of the order was applied only to the extent of ninety days when the employer's request for extension of stay order against the Labor Court decision was valid, and the stay order was automatically terminated by the legislature. Or did not envisage any situation in which the stay order could be extended. If the appellate tribunal cannot decide on an appeal, setting a time limit and automatically granting holidays at the expiration of the ninth day is a conscious and deliberate effort by the lawmaker to protect the interests of employees. Went to where a worker (who was weak) had been reinstated by the Labor Court, so he could not be laid off indefinitely. The order issued by the Labor Appellate Tribunal would have enabled the employer to pay a restored employee in lieu of employment, which had succeeded before the Labor Court, and had to wait, on the balance of disadvantages and financial powers. Certainly for an appeal decision, where they will amend the law by extending a stay order extending more than ninety days, which was set by law under this Such action was not valid. The law and this will not only defeat the spirit of the law, but will also defeat the intention of the legislature, which gives the Constitutional jurisdiction the High Court's power.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
