' The order, dated 24th July, 1984 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 1, Lahore is said to be illegal and improper, whereby the application of the petitioner for ad interim stay was dismissed.
2. The petitioner is a driver and on account of vision failure, his services were terminated. He has challenged the said order and has applied for maintaining status quo till the decision of the main petition.
3. Dr. Muhammad Yaqin, a well-known Eye Specialist, has issued certificate that the vision of the appellant is normal. The petitioner has thus a prima facie case. Obviously the balance of convenience goes in favour of the petitioner, because the inconvenience likely to be caused to him by the refusal of the stay order will be greater than the one likely to be faced by the respondent.
The petitioner will become jobless.
4. The petitioner is likely to suffer from irreparable injury also. As present he being in service has challenged the order of termination and if he is removed from service, be shall have to pray for re- instatement.
5. As a result, the revision is accepted and setting aside the impugned order, the respondent is restrained from implementing the order of removal of the petitioner from service till the decision of the main grievance petition.