' ABDUL HAFEEZ CHEEMA (CHAIRMAN).--- This revision petition impeaches the validity of the order dated 15-10-2010 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No,5, Sargodha whereby the learned Court ordered that the permissible benefits, if due to the grievance petitioner may not be unnecessarily refused to him due to the pendency of the grievance petition.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner bank that the impugned order is uncertain and vague as it has not been pointed out that what type of benefits/facilities were legally permissible to the respondent which have been denied to him by the bank during the pendency of the grievance petition.
3. On the other hand it has been argued by the learned counsel for the respondent that the facilities/benefits could have been easily A determined and even the bank is aware that what type of facilities which were legally permissible to him have been disallowed on account of the filing of the grievance petition.
4. Arguments have been heard and record has been perused.
5. I have gone through the impugned order carefully. The impugned order is vague and unclear. It does not; show that what type of facilities may be allowed to the respondent during the pendency of the grievance petition as such the impugned order is not sustainable.
6. In this view of the matter, the revision petition is accepted and the case is remanded to Labour Court No,5, Sargodha with a direction that the respondent shall be at liberty to submit fresh application mentioning therein the details of the facilities/benefits legally permissible to him which are being refused to him during the pendency of the case by the bank authorities. The learned Labour Court may dispose of the matter in accordance with law.