Find a Lawyer

SAMAD RUBBER WORKS (PVT.) LIMITED versus AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT 1936

There was no jurisdiction to decide the termination / dismissal of a worker or employee under section 15 wages of the dismissal or dismissal authority under the Wages Act, 1936. Decision on the matter related to it but at the same time when the employer's conduct was suspicious and the direct effect of its dismissal / dismissal has a direct bearing on its constituent issue, the authority can determine whether the employee Was terminated from employment or irrespective of his legal status.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014

• ISRAR HUSSAIN v. D.C.O. 2014 PLC(CS) 300
• JAMSHAID ALI KHAN v. GHULAM SAYED 2014 YLR 301
• State v. MUHAMMAD BOOTA 2014 YLR 306
• MUHAMMAD HAYAT v. ZAFAR IQBAL 2014 CLC 308
• MUHAMMAD SARWAR v. MEMBER (JUDL: II), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE 2014 MLD 313
• AHTSHAM-UL-HAQ v. BOARD OF GOVERNORS, DISTRICT PUBLIC SCHOOL AND COLLEGES SECRETARIAT, OKARA 2014 PLC(CS) 315
• SHAHIDA PARVEEN v. ZAFAR IQBAL 2014 PLD 317
• MUZAFFAR KHAN v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE 2014 CLC 318

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2014 →

famous lower court advocate from Taunsa sharif lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes