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. M N‑616 of 1982, decided on 2nd February, 1983.
‑‑ Advance increments‑Railway employee case‑Scheme in vogue allowing four advance increments on improving educational qualifica tions‑Benefit refused on ground that B. A. Examination passed in third division‑Amendment in scheme laying down such condition introduced after passing of B. A. Examination by employee, held, could not have retrospective effect‑Order of Labour Court accept ing grievance petition against non‑grant of such increments, in circumstances, upheld by Appellate Tribunal‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25‑A & 37.
Ch. All Muhammad for Appellant.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 26th January, 1983.
This appeal arises from the decision dated 31st May, 1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 9, Multan, where by the grievance petition of the respondent was accepted and he was directed to be given four advance incentive increments on account of improving his qualification by getting B. A. degree in 3rd division.
2. An incentive scheme was started by the appellant under which four advance increments were to be awarded for improving qualification. This was a good impetus for the employees of the appellant to acquire efficiency by improving their qualification, so the respondent passed B. A. examination in 3rd division in 1968. The scheme was kept in abeyance so the respondent could not get benefit of the scheme. On 12th Septem ber, 1981 amendment was made to the effect that for passing B. A. exa mination in 3rd division increments could not be given. The letter does not show that retrospective effect was given to the scheme by the amend ment, Since the respondent had long before the amendment improved his qualification, the amendment could not deprive him of the benefit. If amendment had been made before or some time after the respondent had qualified he could have further improved by again sitting in the B. A. examination. The learned lower Court, therefore, rightly accepted the grievance petition of the respondent. There is no force in the appeal, which is dismissed in limine.
A. E. Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer