Find a Lawyer

ALMAS AHMAD FIAZ versus SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB HOUSING AND PHYSICAL PLANNING DEVELOPMENT, LAHORE

Article 46 (1) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) prohibiting the application of complaints was employed on the basis of work charge in 1988, after which he was employed on ad hoc basis against permanent post. Given that, in 1998, the post was again changed by the High Court to appeal the application filed by the applicant against such conversion, as it changed the basis of charge, because it had rejected the Intra. After dismissal, no notice of complaint was filed under section 46 (1) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002. The Court of Appeal, petitioner gave notice of the complaint and then the petitioner was allowed by the Labor Court but the High Court dismissed the same notice as the complaint notice was banned after which notification of the ban was issued on 7-11 2002. Was done after 3 years and 4/2 months despite the action taken by the High Court after the removal of the infra-court appeal, it did not give the employer notice of complaint under section 46 (1) of the Industrial Railway. Was. With regard to questions about limitations under section 46 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002, it was decided strictly that no party was allowed to withhold the provisions of the statute of limitations referring to the court. The jurisdiction to resolve complaints over a fixed period was bound to explain the satisfaction of the forum related to the delay of each day, as valuable rights were obtained from the other side which led the Supreme Court to intervene in the High Court decision. Was denied. Leave of appeal denied for labor appeal jurisdiction \ r \ n \ r \ n online advocate from Dera Nawab Sahib lawyer