Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Appeal No. LUR-86 of 1968, heard on 29th November 1968.
---Ss. 30 & 31-Change of conditions of service-Pendency of industrial dispute; at relevant time not established-Section 30, held, not violated and application under S. 31, in circumstances, rightly dismissed by Industrial Court.
Abdul Majeed Qureshi for Appellant.
Date of hearing: 29th November 1968.
This is an appeal against an order of the learned Chairman Industrial Court (Central Zone), Lahore, dated 16th May 1967.
2. The main ground on which the application of the appellant under section 31 of the Industrial Disputes Order Nance, 1559, was dismissed was to at to industrial dispute visa pending at the time when the alleged condition of service of the appellant vas changed. I have beard Mr. Majeed Qureshi; the Representative of the appe112nt. He was unable to satisfy n:e that any industrial dispute in fact was pending at the tine when the rescinding is said to have charged the condition of service of the appellant. In the Memorandum of Appeal also all that is mentioned is the ingredient of section 31 of Industrial Districts Ordinance of 1959. The Memorandum of Appeal does not give the number of the Industrial Dispute pending at that time. I agree with the finding of the learned Chairman that in the absence of pendency of an industrial dispute, it cannot be said that the provision of section 30 of Industrial Disputes Ordinance) 1959, was in any way affected.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer