Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

versus


Continuing the suspension series gives the latest reason for every day of the continuation of the suspension, as the Labor Court rejected the request for a complaint against the allegedly invalid suspension, saying that the complaint regarding the date of the suspension order The notice was bound, the complaint was submitted during the continuation of the notice of suspension, the appellate tribunal had time-barred without restraining the Labor Court order and the industrial relations ordinance on the merit (1969). XXIII), section 25A & 37

1983 P L C 596

[Labour Appellate Tribunal

Punjab

]

Before Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal

MAQBOOL HUSSAIN

versus

DIVISIONAL

SUPERINTENDENT

,

PAKISTAN

RAILWAYS,

LAHORE

Appeal No. FD‑758 of 1981, decided on 6th March, 1983. .

Industrial dispute‑---

--‑‑Suspension ‑ Continuing wrong ‑ Every day of continuity of suspension gives fresh cause of action‑ Grievance petition against alleged wrongful suspension dismissed by Labour Court on ground that grievance notice was time‑barred with reference to date of suspension order‑Grievance notice served during continuity of suspension‑Grievance notice, held, not time‑barred ‑ Order of Labour Court set aside by Appellate Tribunal and case remanded for decision on merits‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25‑A & 37.

Abdul Ghafoor for Appellant. , .

Agha Taj Muhammad for Respondent.

Date of hearing :1st March, 1983.

JUDGEMENT

This appeal emanates from the decision dated 1942‑1981 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 7, Gujranwala, where by the grievance petition of the appellant was dismissed as time‑barred.

2. The appellant was suspended on 30‑9‑1980. He in continuance of the suspension order gave grievance notice on 10‑6‑1981 which f‑was in due course followed by the grievance petition. The petition was not time barred as it was given in continuation of the suspension order and suspension is a continuing wrong. On every day on which the suspension continues fresh cause of grievance occurs to the suspended person. Learned counsel for the respondent has not been able to say anything effective against this view.

3. As upshot of the observations made above, I accept the appeal and setting aside the impugned decision of the learned lower Court and declaring the grievance petition of the appellant as within time, remand the case for decision of the remaining points including merits .

Appeal accepted

Find a Lawyer Near You

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

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
best law firm from Pindi gheb lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.