DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, MULTAN versus EJAZ AHMAD KHAN
Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Section 25A & 38 (3) Complaint / Appeal The challenge of the Luxury Standing Order of the Labor Court was challenged before the Appellate Tribunal on the ground that the petition was submitted by the lawyer and not by the applicant himself. Was presented by neither the employees nor the plausible argument. The petition was filed by the lawyer but he himself was appearing before the Labor Court, which could not be mistakenly recording the fact that the evidence-based facts dispute objected to the appeal before the Labor Court Appellate Tribunal. Not taken away, refusing to allow the opportunity for evidence before the parties to appeal the failure of the party to decide on a specific point after the opportunity for proof and to seek remand in the Labor Court before yourself.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
