Find a Lawyer

HUSSAIN BUX SANJRANI versus LAHORE ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WAPDA, LAHORE

49 (4) (e) National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedures and Functions) Regulations, 1973, Regln 32 (2) (c) Establishment accused of unfair labor by employers acting as linemen. It was his exchange letter. Issued so that he could not perform legal trade union activities in the capacity of the CBA Union's divisional secretary in the establishment. It does not appear that the transfer of the legal status of the applicants was issued by the applicants as a result of any acts of abuse by the activities of the trade union, throughout Pakistan, transferring any of the employers' entities, Was subject to the terms and conditions. Employers had the right to transfer an employee in the best interest of the administration and under the utility of employment, which cannot be termed an unfair labor practice act, and there were usually allegations of baldness in the application against employers There is no specific example of unfair labor practice. The applicant either showed in his affidavit, or in the affidavit filed in support of the application under Regln 32 (2) (c) of the National Industrial Relations Commission (Regulation Duty) Regulations, 1973, or the oath in the documents filed so far A document or document is submitted by the applicant, so that the employer can establish a case of inappropriate wages. There is no industrial dispute. Pending, clause (4) of section 49 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002. E), interim relief cannot be granted against any action referred to in section 63 (1) (d) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002. An unfair practice case against the employer and the National Industrial Relations Commission (Regulation) immigration advocates contact from Tando Adam lawyer