' This appeal under section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 13-5-1995 passed in W.P. No, 1702 of 1988 whereby the Constitutional petition of the petitioner was dismissed.
2. The brief facts are that the appellant was working as Junior Commercial Assistant in the Pakistan Railways. He expressed desire to leave the service and requested that he be allowed retirement with effect from 3-5-1987 which request was approved by the respondent, on 5-3-1987. On 21-3- 1987, by appellant sent a grievance notice under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 purportedly against the order dated 5-3-1987 stating that the Station Master, against whom he had grievance, had been transferred, therefore, the cause for his request or premature retirement does not exist and as such his request dated 1-2-1987 be treated as cancelled. The said request was not accepted by the respondent whereupon the petitioner filed a petition under section 25-A of the above Ordinance before the Punjab Labour Court No, 9, Multan on 20-4-1987.
Along with the said petition an application for temporary injunction was also filed which was allowed by the Labour Court on 2-2-1988 by suspending the operation of the order dated 5-3-1987.
On a revision this order was set aside and the application for interim relief was dismissed by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 13-4-1988. The petitioner was again retired or restrained from continuing service on 16-4-1988 by the respondent and retirement benefits were determined on the basis of original order directing his retirement from 3-5-1987 whereupon W.P.
No, 1702 of 1988 was instituted by the appellant with the prayer that his retirement benefits should be calculated on the basis of his last pay drawn i,e, on 16-4-1988 and not on 3-5-1987, which was dismissed as mentioned above.
2-A. This appeal is not competent in view of proviso of section 3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 reproduced below for ready reference:-- "(2) An appeal shall also lie to a Bench of two Judges of a High Court from an order made by a Single Judge of that Court under clause (1) of Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan not being an order made under sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph (b) of that clause; provided that the appeal referred to in this subsection shall not be available or competent if the application brought before the High Court under Article 199 arises out of any proceedings in which the law applicable provided for at least one appeal or one revision or one review to any Court, Tribunal or authority against the original order."
' The right of appeal/revision was provided against the original order of the retirement dated 5-3- 1987. The grievance petition against the said order was heard and dismissed by the learned Labour Court on 11-4-1989. This order was challenged by the petitioner in appeal which was dismissed by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal on 16-5-1989. In this view of the matter, this appeal is not maintainable as there is remedy of appeal/revision against the original. Order under Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. In the present case the revisional and appellate jurisdiction of Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal were invoked by parties as stated above. The above provision of law has been considered by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Mst. Karim Bibi v. Hussain Bakhsh and others PLD 1984 SC 344 and Muhammad Abdullah v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Central, Lahore PLD 1985 Supreme Court 107 Wherein it has been held that an I.-C.A. Is not maintainable where against the original order, provision of appeal, revision or review is provided under the relevant Statute.
3. Respectfully relying upon the above stated judgments of the Supreme Court, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.