Find a Lawyer

MIR ALAM versus REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS

Sections 46 and 48 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), withdrew from service respondents who were dismissed by the administration, filed a complaint against their dismissal, which was rejected by the Labor Court, Appeal filed against section 48 (1) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002, filed before the High Court, the respondents of the said appeal filed a petition under section 48 (3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002 which was decided by the High Court. The court did so under a disputed order, under which the membership of the respondent as a member of the trade union was restored to the High Court while the respondent Dealing with the petition filed by N was Under section 48 (3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002, material facts were completely ignored, which, if considered, would be considered in section 48 (3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 2002. ) The above order never allows the High Court to deal with the petition. , Did not take notice of the fact that the respondents' decision under section 48 (1) of the Ordinance was pending and it was not understandable that the fact was not brought to the notice of the High Court and this Strangely, the High Court should come to the conclusion that the Registrar, trade unions, should be instructed to conduct fresh elections while respondents are allowed to participate in the selection of collective bargaining agents, when they Were not even in service Went and was granted and the verdict of the Supreme Court could not be considered forbidden law websites from Shadiwal lawyer