Find a Lawyer

UNITED BANK LIMITED versus RAJA M. SARFRAZ KHAN

Section 49 (4) (e) National Industrial Relations Commission (Regulations and Duties) Regulations, 1973, Regulation 32 (2) (e) Violations of the orders of the National Industrial Relations Commission Complaints Bank against a retiring employee The bank alleges that it had filed a complaint against the employee and 16 others before the National Industrial Relations Commission, requesting that the employees be instructed that they themselves. Do not make members of the Bank's trade union a member and officer and do not issue defamatory statements or defamatory statements as official of the Union Commission Issues or notices issued prohibited orders, but the employee, despite the prohibited orders, was committing numerous instances of disobedience and disobedience to the commission order, the employee violated the commission's orders. The threat of serious consequences to the union leader and to the employees if the demands of the employees were not followed, in which case his mandate and his commitment to the Commission were violated, which led to the National Industrial Relations Commission (Regulation and Duties). Acting under Regulation 32 (2) (e) of the Regulations 1973, directed the employee to deposit a bond of guarantee of Rs 50,000. Preventing it from the alleged act of presenting its good conduct and positioning itself as a union leader, addressing meetings in this position, and issuing threats to the bank for the cause of labor as a union leader. \ n patent advocate from Gadoon Amazai lawyer