DECISION ' Under this Revision Petition the petitioners/applicants have invoked suo mow revisional power of this Tribunal to consider the legality, correctness and propriety of the order, dated 29-9-1988, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No,VII at Sukkur, whereby the grievance petition of the respondents was allowed.
2. I have heard Mr.Shabbir Ahmad Awan, learned Advocate for the applicants and Mr.Manzar Alam, learned counsel for the respondents and have also gone through the record and proceedings of the case.
3. The grievance of the respondents was that though they were doing same work they were not allowed payment of consolidated piece work at the rate of A 33-1/3% of pay per month as paid to the productive and non-productive units of the Moughalpura Shops, Hyderabad Shops and Carriage Factory, Islamabad.
4. It was not disputed before the learned Labour Court that job done by the' respondents was similar to job done by the workmen in Workshops wherein they were paid the said payment. The learned counsel for the applicants could not explain this discrimination among the workmen doing same type of work except that decision was taken by the Ministry. It may be pointed that impugned order was appealable order but the applicants did not choose to file any appeal. Only when respondents filed complaint under subsection (8) of section 25-A of I.R.O., 1969, this Revision Application was filed. Under the circumstances of the case, the impugned order does not look improper, illegal or incorrect and I see no reason to interfere with the order in the exercise of the suo motu Revisional jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
5. It may be pointed that the learned Labour Court has not awarded any back benefits to the respondents therefore the order of the learned Labour Court awarding the respondents the payment would be enforceable from the date of order of Labour Court.
6. The Revision Application is, accordingly, dismissed.