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.
Petition No. LHR‑219 of 1985, decided on 24th July, 1985
‑‑‑ Promotion‑‑Training course for promotion‑‑Petitioner not selected for course‑‑Petition before Labour Court challenging such decision with prayer for ad interim direction to employer to allow him to join course‑ Prayer opposed on grounds that petitioner was not sent for course due to indifferent record‑‑Affidavit of petitioner not mentioning that service record was without adverse remarks‑‑Labour Court, in circumstances, held, was justified in dismissing petition and order of Labour Court on basis of material on record was upheld in revision by Appellate Tribunal‑‑Revision‑‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss.25‑A & 38(3‑a).
H.R. Haider for Petitioners.
Date of hearing: 20th July, 1985.
The order, dated 17‑7‑1985 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore is reported to be wrong and improper.
2. The petitioners have not been selected for being sent to take up a course for their promotion to the next higher post. The petitioners have brought before the learned lower. Court an application under section 25‑A and had prayed for an ad interim direction to the respondents to allow them to join the course. The application for interim direction has been opposed in reply by the respondents in which it has been contended that due to indifferent service record of the petitioners they have not been sent up for the course. In the affidavit filed by the petitioners in support of their petition for ad interim injunction, it has not been said that their record is not indifferent or that there are no adverse remarks against them. This being so, the learned lower Court was justified in dismissing the petition. In the affidavit filed with the revision, no doubt, it has been asserted by the petitioners that their service record is excellent but the thing to be seen is if the learned lower Court's order according to the material existing before it is proper or not. Since such an affidavit has not given before the learned lower Court, the petition was rightly dismissed. If the petitioners challenge the correctness of the position taken by the respondents in reply, proper thing for the petitioners was to summon the record and satisfy the learned lower Court.
3. As a result the revision is dismissed in limine. However, the learned lower Court is directed to give preference to the grievance petition so that if the petitioners ultimately succeed, the time meant for joining the course may not expire.
A.E.
Revision dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer