Find a Lawyer

Application No. HYD‑266 of 1981, heard on 19^thMay, 1981.

‑‑‑ S. 38 (3‑a) ‑ Revision‑ Jurisdiction of Appellate. Tribunal Extends only to proceedings and orders of Labour Court under Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969‑Appellate order of Labour Court and proceeding thereof under Payment of Wages Act, 1936 Not covered by sue motu revisional jurisdiction of Appellate Tribunal‑Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936), S. 17.

National Cement industries v. Dr. Miss Akhtar Jamal 1980 P L C 282 rel.

Nemo for Applicant.

Date of hearing: 19^thMay, 1981.

This purports to be an application on behalf of the Pakistan Railways for invoking the sue motu revisional powers of this Tribunal under sub section (3‑a) of section 38, I. R. O., in respect of an appellate order passed by the learned VIth Labour Court at Hyderabad on 10th Decem ber, 1980, under section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.

2. Neither any one from the Railways nor their learned counsel who has filed this information, is present.

3. It was pointed out by this Tribunal in the case of National Cement industries v. Dr, Miss Akhtar Jamal (1980 P L Q 282), that subsection (3) of section 38, I. R. O., confers revisional powers on this Tribunal only in respect of proceedings taken and orders passed by the Labour Courts under the I. R. O., but as appeals under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, are not decided by the Labour Courts under the provisions of the I. R. O., but under the former Act, the sue motu powers of revision of this Tribunal do not extend or cover the appellate orders passed by the Labour Courts under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.

4. In view of the aforesaid decision, this Tribunal clearly has no jurisdiction in the matter. Accordingly no proceedings by way of exercise of sue motu revisional powers under subsection (3‑a) of section 38, I. R. O. can be initiated by this Tribunal.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.