' This is an application under section 25-A of the I. R.
0., 1969 for re-instatement in service. The brief facts of the case are as under.
2. The petitioner was appointed as a Surveyor under the respondent but on 7th June, 1982 he was removed from service by way of retrenchment. Feeling aggrieved from this he served a grievance notice on the respondent and after that he came to this Court by way of the present application.
He has alleged that he was a General Secretary of the Trade Union and for that purpose he had been victimised. He has further alleged that previous to this a warning was issued to him and his increments were also stopped. He has further alleged that the principle of 'first come last go' was violated in his case as junior persons to him were still in service. The application has been contested and after recording evidence of the parties I have heard the learned counsel on both sides.
3. The respondent in this case raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner had gone to some foreign country and he had not himself filed this application which is liable to be dismissed on this very ground. It was admitted by the petitioner's witness that the petitioner had proceeded to Iraq.
This application has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and he has been appearing on behalf of the petitioner throughout the proceedings and even at present the petitioner is in that country. In this connection the learned counsel for the respondent relied on an authority of Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal reported as 1981 PL C 760 wherein it has been held that grievance petition before a Labour Court through attorney is not maintainable. In the precedent case the application was not made by the worker himself but it was filed by the lawfully constituted attorney. It was held that the application could not be presented nor it could be maintained in the Labour Court. Relying on this authority I also hold that this application is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed.