ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, LABOUR AND INSPECTOR OF FACTORIES, HYDERABAD versus NAEEM ALI MUHAMMAD MUNSHI, EMPLOYER, SHALIMAR FOOD PRODUCTS
Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Section 25 A retirement superannuation appellant retired from employment after reaching the age of 60 The appellant claimed that he had not reached the age of puberty, date of birth At the time of the admission of the appellant to the D service in the register at the time of admission, an overwriting of the data appeared in the year of birth which was initially 1934 but then, through overwriting, made it 1925. The appellant had also prepared a civil surgeon's medical certificate in which the appellant was to be 55 years old. The year of the company's entry into the card is shown as the year of birth 1934 and the national identity card is 1936. However, the date given by the administration for the grant of the benefits of old age was 1925 as such evidence regarding the date of birth was not satisfactory.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
solicitors from Samma Satta lawyer
