Sections 46 and 48 of the Complaint Appeal Employer, who was dismissed from the job, filed a complaint, but stated that after the introduction of Section 2A of the Complaint Petition Service Tribunals Act 1973, the employees were returned to the employee. , Then referred to the service tribunal, but dismissed by the service tribunal on the point of maintaining the appeal filed by the employees, the employee suspended the service tribunal's order before the Supreme Court, which ruled on the merit. The service tribunal was remanded and the employee received only relief. To the extent that the service tribunal changed the penalty for mandatory retirement from the employee, however, did not benefit from the decision of the service tribunal, which was in the field, the employee did his best for pension benefits, but as a result I came to no conclusion. Employees arrived at the Labor Court under the legal rules, but later changed these legal principles to illegal laws, so such a conversion could not hold the field because the legal bank's rules and regulations directors' resolution. Legal rules could not be made illegal, the statute could not be treated solely to satisfy the wishes and mood of the bank officials, unless it could be altered. In accordance with the law, in the present case, whatever the employee who was an employee is the situation. The bank, in the jurisdiction of the service tribunal judge of the service tribunal, under which the sentence of dismissal was changed to mandatory retirement and would be banned and the bank authorities were also required to issue letter and letter
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
