' The revisions captioned above report that the orders dated 20-3-1986 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No,2, Lahore are without jurisdiction and of no legal effect.
2. The petitioners had brought separate applications under section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act for claiming gratuity, five per cent. Profit for the years 1978 to 1980, bonus for the said years and encashment of unavailed leave. The learned authority has dismissed the applications so far as the claim with regard to five per cent. Profit, bonus and encashment of unavailed leave for the reasons that no evidence was produced by the petitioners to prove the claim. So far as gratuity is concerned, it was held that since the petitioners had been dismissed from service, they could not claim gratuity without setting the order of dismissal set aside by a competent Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not challenged the orders of the Courts below so far as the claim of the petitioners with regard to five per cent. Profit, bonus and encashment of unavailed leave are concerned. So far as gratuity is concerned, he has argued that the orders of dismissal were not passed by the employer but by a different person and the Authority, therefore, had jurisdiction to go behind such orders. I am afraid there is no force in this argument of the learned counsel. An order which is void or without jurisdiction may be ignored but it becomes necessary to challenge the same when it is enforced against a party. Since the respondent had not acceded to the claim of the petitioners with regard to gratuity on the plea that they had been dismissed from service, it had become necessary for the petitioners first to have the order of dismissal challenged before the learned Labour Court and after they had remained successful, only then they could go to the Authority for claiming gratuity. No doubt, the petitioners assert that they had resigned from the posts but no written resignation nor any order passed thereon were produced in evidence.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has admitted that no written resignation was made nor any written orders were passed. The pleas, therefore, is fallacious. Needless to say that an order of dismissal can be challenged by an employee before the Labour Court if he is a worker and the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act has no jurisdiction in this respect.
4. As a result, all the five revisions fail and are dismissed.