' The revision captioned above challenges the order dated 26-6-1988 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 3, Lahore at Ferozewala, whereby it has been observed that the petition of the respondent for being given duty cannot be accepted during the pendency of his application in which he has challenged the order of termination. It has been observed that the said petition would be decided along with the petition wherein the termination has been challenged. The case was ordered to come up for further proceedings on 6-7-1988 along with the connected case.
2. The facts are that in the previous grievance petition which is still pending the respondent had prayed for a direction that he be made permanent. In the meantime his services were terminated, therefore, he brought another application under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 for his reinstatement. The case of the petitioner is that the earlier petition should be decided before the decision of the subsequent application in which the respondent has challenged the order of termination. Since such a prayer has not been disallowed to the petitioner by the impugned order dated 26-6-1988, the petitioner had no occasion to come in revision and there appears to be no reason for exercising suo motu revisional powers.
3. As a result, the revision fails and is dismissed in limine. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.