Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AKHTAR versus CHAIRMAN, WAPDA

Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Sections 16 and 22A (8) (g) based on an Assessment Committee / Assessment Council report by employers unfairly employing unfair labor practice, based on their grade range. Allotted which they were working on later, when the employees were transferred to the next party, they would be entitled to the maximum rent limit as per the ceiling, on the recommendation of the Assessment Committee / Assessment Council. in which their work was gone and paid to the owners accordingly. Houses from which employees acquired houses according to their roof / privilege, later found that employees were entitled to the maximum grade under which they were already working and that their employees had to move and There was no need to change the rent ceiling due to employees. Recovery proceedings against employees were initiated in connection with payments to the owners of the respective houses. The rent of the houses was increased. There was no unethical motive for the acquisition, nor did they commit any act of unfair labor in this regard; in fact the employees deserved the maximum. From the date of the move to the next level, the houses are subject to their respective status, even if the homeowners were paid some money illegally, it was a mistake by the owners and the employees were victimized. Could not Under the circumstances, the same employer was not entitled to recover the money from the employees list of supreme court advocates from Khangarh lawyer