Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. GA‑66 of 1980/Pb., decided on 31st October, 1982.

‑‑ Ss. 25‑A & 38 (3) read with West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958), S. 17 (1‑A)‑WAPDA employee seeking remedy against termination of service under S. 17 (1‑A) of West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958‑Labour Court dismissing grievance petition for want of jurisdiction in view of said provisions of Act of i958 Original impugned order of Authority not on record‑Order of Labour Court, in circumstances, set aside by Appellate Tribunal and case remanded for decision afresh after bringing on record original impugned order and affording proper opportunity of evidence to parties.

Ch. Ghulam Qadir Cheema for Appellant.

Rashid A. Malik for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 24th October, 1982.

In this appeal the decision, dated 10th January, 1980 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 7, Gujranwala has been challenged whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his re‑in-state ment was dismissed.

The appellant's services were terminated under section 17 (1‑A) of WAPDA Act on offer of the payment of one month's pay in lieu of one month's notice. According to section 17 (1‑A) such an order cannot be challenged in Law Court as jurisdiction has been barred in this section. On this ground the learned lower Court dismissed the petition. The original order of termination has not been brought on the record and now the file has been shown to me. Alongwith the appellant some others also were terminated under section 17 (1‑A) and their petitions too were dismissed by the same Court. As the original orders were not on record and the order which had been produced was not of the Authority. The cases were remanded for fresh decision after the original had been brought on the record. If I express my final opinion in this appeal the decision of the cases remanded would be prejudiced and moreover the right of appeal to the unsuccessful party will be lost. I, therefore, accept the appeal and setting aside the decision of the learned lower Court remand the case with the direction that after the original order of termination alleged to have been passed by Authority itself is brought on the record and after affording proper opportunity to the parties to produce evidence if any, the case be decided afresh.

A. E. Appeal accepted. Case remanded.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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