Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Revision No.SG‑20 of 1986, decided on 25th January, 1986.
‑‑‑S. 36‑‑Practice and procedure‑‑Necessary party‑‑Employer is necessary party in labour cases of disputes between workers and employers.
Nemo for respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 in person.
Nemo for Respondents Nos. 5 and 6.
Date of hearing: 25th January, 1986.
The order dated 18‑12‑1985 is reported to be without jurisdiction and of no legal effect.
2. Vide the impugned order the learned lower Court struck of the names of the Mayor Municipal Corporation, Sargodha from the list of respondents. Both of them are employers of the petitioners. In labour cases the dispute is between the workers and the employer, therefore, the employers are the necessary parties. Needless to say that without a necessary party a case cannot run. The learned Lower Court thus committed mistake in striking of the names of respondents Nos. l and 2who were necessary party. Accordingly the revision is accepted and setting aside the impugned order the names of Municipal Corporation, Sargodha and Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Sargodha are restored as respondents. The case is sent back for decision on merits.
A.E.
Case remanded.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer