Pakistan Case Law← Search
1990 PLC 490

MUHAMMAD IHSAN ULLAH vs SUFI SOAP AND CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES Ltd.

Citation1990 PLC 490
CourtLabour Appellate Tribunal
Case No.Revision No, LHR-274 of 1987
Date1987-07-08
Judge(s)Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi
ResultRevision accepted

This is a revision reporting that the order dated 9-5-1987 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No,3, Lahore at Ferozewala whereby application for restoration of the petitioner was dismissed is wrong and improper.

2. The ground for non-appearance given in the application for restoration was that the petitioner had fallen ill. So far as the learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned the ground of his non- appearance was that he had gone to Islamabad. Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the revision and has argued that since no medical certificate was produced in support of illness, the petition for restoration was rightly dismissed. He relied upon 1986 PLC 187. The defect in the order of the learned lower Court is that no opportunity of proving the plea taken in the application for restoration was afforded to the petitioner before dismissing his petition. The petition was duly supported by an affidavit and if learned lower Court was not prepared to accept the affidavit then opportunity should have been given to the petitioner to produce evidence to prove that he had actually fallen ill and was unable to appear on the date fixed. This is true that no medical certificate was produced but if opportunity to produce evidence had been given to the petitioner, he may have produced medical certificate if any obtained by him with regard to his illness. Since the petitioner has been condemned unheard, interference in the impugned order of the learned lower Court appears to be necessary.

3. As a result the revision is accepted and setting aside the impugned order the restoration application is remanded with the direction that after giving B opportunity to the parties to produce evidence, it be decided afresh.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search