1. This is an appeal under section 36-D of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, against an order dated 23-8-74, passed by the Junior Labour Court, Lyallpur, whereby the petition of the appellant for reinstate--ment was dismissed. The employer in this case is Field Manager, Pakistan Oxygen Limited. He had some posts of badly workers with him. In September 1973, a question arose before the employer as to which of the to badly workers namely Hamid Mukhtar and Mohammad Siddique was senior. It may be noted here that "Badly" is a workman who is appointed on the post of a permanent worker or probationer, who is temporarily absent. The record of the employer shows that Hamid Mukhtar was senior. It appears that the employer employed Hamid Mukhtar on the basis of his record when a post of Badly arose with him. Offended by this decision Muhammad Siddique filed a petition under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 before the Junior Labour Court for his reinstate--ment on the ground that he was senior to Hamid Mukhtar. In this petition Hamid Mukhtar was not made a party. Record of the employer was disbelieved by the Junior Labour Court and a finding was given in favour of Muhammad Siddique. The employer went in appeal and the Labour Court rejected the appeal, confirming the finding of the lower Court. The copy of this decision is Exh. R. A. Obviously, Muhammad Siddique should have been re-employed but the employer did not do so. The position was that neither Hamid Mukhtar was re-employed nor Muhammad Siddique was given any post. However, Hamid Mukhtar knocked the door of the Junior Labour Court by the present petition which was filed on 20th May 1974. The Junior Labour Court held that the previous finding in the case of Muhammad Siddique were binding and so the petition of Hamid Mukhtar was rejected. He has come up in appeal. My learned predecessor held that Muhammad Siddique was a necessary party sad so he was impleaded during this appeal. At present Mohammad Siddique is working as Oilman in the Municipal Committee, Lyallpur. Notice was sent to him but he reported that the name of his father was given incorrect. The appellant has filed an affidavit to the effect that Muhammad Siddique who is working as Oilman in the Municipal Committee is the same Badly who had a tie with him in Pakistan Oxygen Limited. Obviously, Muhammad Siddique is not interested in Badly work. As far as the appellant and the employer is concerned, they have no dispute. Both of them admit that Hamid Mukhtar was senior to Muhammad Siddique.
2. In these circumstances, the appeal is accepted, order of the lower Court is set aside and the appellant is ordered to be re-instated. He shall not be entitled to any back benefits.