FAWAD ARMED versus PEARL CONTINENTAL HOTEL KARACHI
Section 25 (8) (g) of the National Industrial Relations Commission (Regulations and Duties) Regulations, 1973, Regulation 32 (2) (c) unfair labor practice by employers, a petition against the applicant from the Department of Establishment Another, allegedly such a transfer, was due to the owners' mismanagement and bad intentions to curb its trade union activities and unfair employers from such practices. In the realm of practice, the petitioner was transferred from the engineering department to the grocery department. The grocery store in the building and premises was as easy to handle as against the engineering store, during the applicant's transfer, the applicant's terms of service had not changed, all components of unfair labor practice were missing because unfair labor. There was no specific example of practice. The application states that the employee's transfer was an honest and unfair action of the employer, if there had been no such transfer, the fraudulent petitioner had failed to prove that due to any of the unfair labor practices, the trade union's activities It was moved by unfair labor practice. If the petitioner had failed to make any case for the sanction of stay, the balance of the facility was not in his favor and he would not have suffered any irreparable loss or injury if the order was not approved accordingly. So not only was the application made under Regln 32 (2) (c) of the National Industrial Relations Commission (Regulations and Duties) Regulations 1973, but it was also an important request dismissed.
Related judgments — National Industrial Relations Commission, 2010
