Find a Lawyer

Revision No. LHR‑287 of 1984, decided on 30th October, 1984.

‑‑‑ S. 17‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969); Ss. 35 (5) & 38(3‑a) ‑ Revision ‑ Order of Labour Court refusing to restore appeal against order of Authority under Payment of Wages Act, 1936 dismissed in default‑Cannot be assumed as order passed under S. 17 of Payment of Wages Act, 1936 read with S. 35 (5) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1908‑‑Not open to revision before Labour Appellate Tribunal.

Syed Intisar Hussain for Petitioner.

Hasan Bilal for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 28th October, 1984.

The titled revision gives information that the order, dated 5th May, 1984 passed by the learned Presiding Officer Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore dismissing the application of the petitioner for the readmission of its appeal is wrong and ultra vires.

2. The petitioner lodged an appeal against the order of the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act under section 17 of the said Act. It was dismissed in default at 11.30 a.m. The learned counsel for the petitioner lodged petition for readmission on the same date within Court hours but it was dismissed having no merits.

3. Since on the same day application for restoration was lodged the petition was worth consideration but the difficulty is that no revision lies under section 38(3a). Needless to say that there is no provision in section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act of Industrial Relations Ordinance. 1969 for the restoration of an appeal dismissed in default. No doubt. section 35(5) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 has recognised the power of appeal given to Labour Courts under section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act and, therefore, where such appeals have been decided on merits, it can be said that the appeal has been decided under section 17 read with section 35(5) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance. 1969 but there being no provision in section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act for restoration, it cannot be assumed that the order refusing to readmit the appeal has been passed under section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act with the authority given by section 35 (5) supra. The Labour Courts while dismissing appeals in default brought under section 17 adopt their own procedure and under the same procedure have jurisdiction to restore the appeal but they cannot be said to have passed such orders under section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act read with‑.section 35(5) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969.

4. As a result, the revision is filed as incompetent.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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