HAQ NAWAZ KHAN versus DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, MULTAN
Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Section 38 (3a) The Payment Act (IV of 1936), Sections 15 and 17, the Labor Appellate Tribunal itself or the employee's own modification powers could inform the Tribunal of the order to challenge it. No reviews could be wanted. Railway Gatman's claim under the Wages Act, 1936, paid by any party authority and the appellate court, accepts the claim that he was a permanent worker for overtime wages on a 12-hour continuous duty on the package. Yes, it has no objection to the jurisdiction of the applications. The review was denied to prevent interference, if the employer had any right to review it, the court's decision below could have been challenged by the employer's jurisdiction.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
