LAW MIRZ A versus DIRECTOR (ADORN.) WASA, L.DA LAHORE
Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Section 51 Applicants for Determination of Employment Rehabilitation and Recovery of Returned Benefits, which the Labor Court had reinstated, denied that it had asked its lawyer instead of going to appeal to the employer. He was instructed to take advantage of it and directed that his rehabilitation applicant also deny his signature. Applicants to the Complaint Appeal appear in the prosecution of any such Opposition Council for the applicant and then cease to be an advocate if they talk about the award of benefits yet to be returned. There was no case pending before the Labor Court after the decision to appeal the complaint was made, nor was such a compromise due to the fact that the method of compromise was not adopted after giving priority to the appeal, which was clearly It was shown that the applicant had filed a complaint regarding the right to his previous benefits after the decision of his complaint. It was stated that the evidence presented by the respondents did not affect the trust, was held aside by accepting the same order of wrongful Labor Court and the case was remanded for the determination and recovery of the back benefits. Was
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
