MUHAMMAD IQBAL versus MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK, NOORIABAD
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 Sections O1 and 12 (3) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), removal of section 25 services Appellant was employed as a guard / pawn with the respondent. Which will be applied for the first time from 15. 2 1988 to 14 7 1988 and then 13 10 1988 to 10 1 1989 and their services were terminated on 10 1989 1989, considered as appellant and permanent worker claiming to work more than 183 days a year. Is. Section O (1) (b) of the West Pakistan Ordinance VI of 1968 does not have any evidence that the appellant acted against the permanent post. The respondent's witness denied that the appellant was a permanent employee nor was it proved There is other evidence to show that the appellant acted against a permanent post order. The termination was not issued in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 (3) under which the service must be terminated in writing, stating the obvious reasons. The ndtory and termination order was not issued accordingly, it was illegal and neither was enforceable
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
