Find a Lawyer

Petition No. MN‑268 of 1984, decided on 31st March, 1985.

‑‑‑Ss. 25‑A & 38(3‑a)‑‑Scope of S. 25‑A‑‑Grievance petition against suspension order‑‑Order of suspension already passed cannot be vacated pending decision on main petition‑‑Labour Court accepting application for suspension of order before final decision on grievance petition‑‑Order of Labour Court set aside in revision by Appellate Tribunal‑‑Held: (i) final remedy was granted by Labour Court by impugned Order before deciding grievance petition, and (ii) Labour Court could not vacate order of suspension already passed but would order that pending decision on grievance petition no fresh order should be passed after expiry of existing period of suspension.

Gulzar Ahmad Alvi for Petitioners.

Respondent in person.

Date of hearing; 12th March, 1985.

The order, dated 9‑8‑1984 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.9, Multan has been reported to be without lawful authority and null and avoid.

2. The respondent was suspended. He challenged the order of suspension in a portion under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 and moved miscellaneous application for the suspension of the order of suspension. The application has been accepted and the order of suspension has been suspended before finally deciding the grievance petition. An order of suspension that has already been passed cannot be vacated. However, it could be ordered that till the decision of the main grievance petition no fresh order of suspension on the expiry of the period of existing suspension should be passed. The final remedy has been granted by the learned lower Court by the impugned order before deciding the main petition.

3. As a result, the revision is accepted and the impugned order is set aside.

A. E.

Revision 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.