1. ' This is a revision application under section 38(3-a) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969.
2. Against the order, dated 12-3-1999, passed on a miscellaneous application by the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No,1, Karachi. The order being very short, it seems beneficial to reproduce as under:-- ' Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The evidence of the respondent's side had not yet started. The 'applicant has still not been cross-examined. The respondent side would be at liberty to produce any such document with the affidavit during its evidence. The present stage seems to be a premature stage for moving of this application for summoning the contractor. However, any such evidence may be summoned if the Court deems fit in the interest of justice; for the time being the respondent is required to cross-examine the applicant. This application is accordingly disposed of.
3. ' Announced in open Court.
4. (Sd.)
5. (Akhtar Farooq)
6. ' Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No, I, Karachi."
7. I have heard Mr. Muhammad Farooq A. Ghani, learned counsel for the applicant. I find no illegality, impropriety or even incorroctness in the order, impugned before me in the revision application.
8. Moreover, the evidence has not yet started. The practice of filing applications and on rejections, coming in revision in the Tribunal has become a fashion, which hampers the proceedings of the Main case and disturbs the course of justice.
3. As already observed by me in Revision Applications Nos, Kar-4 and Kar-5 of 1999 (Muslim Commercial Bank Limited. v. Muhammad Yaseen and Saeed Ghani). By my order, dated 17-5-1999, fragmentary applications of such nature are most inconvenient and tend to delay the administration of justice, as also held by a Full Bench of the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeals Nos, 53 and 54 of 1999 filed by Mohtarma Benazir Butto and her spouse. Asif Ali Zardari. I, therefore, do not feel inclined to interfere in the impugned order. The revision application is dismissed in limine.
4. Miscellaneous Application No, 2l6 of 1999 having become infructuous also stands dismissed.