' Ghulam Rasul appellant an employee of Packages Limited filed application under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 against the respondent seeking his re-instatement into service. This application remained pending before the Junior Labour Court No, 2, Lahore. In the said Court 15th July, 1975 was fixed as date of hearing for filing of reply by the respondent but on that date the appellant absented himself when the case was called. The learned Lower Court recorded an order for calling the case again on the same day at 1-30 p. m.
2. The case was called for the second time at 2 p.m. But the appellant was still absent. The representative of the respondent was present. Consequently application filed by the appellant was dismissed for default.
3. The present appeal has been filed impugning the aforesaid order dated 15th July, 1975 of the learned lower Court.
4. It is maintained in the memorandum of appeal that on the date of hearing the appellant could not appear on account of his serious illness and that his counsel also was busy in some other Court on that date. It is noteworthy that no Medical Certificate regarding the alleged ailment of the appellant has been produced.
5. Ordinarily the appellant should have filed application before the learned Lower Court for restoration of his case and the said Court could restore the same if it was satisfied that there was sufficient cause for doing so. This procedure for the reasons best known to the appellant has not been followed. The alleged ailment of the appellant on the date of hearing as stated earlier, is not proved Similarly no plausible reason is forthcoming A for the absence of the appellants counsel till 2 p.m. In cases where a counsel is engaged, explanation is required to be submitted about the absence of the counsel. It has been so held in Akhtar Hussain v. Settlement Commissioner, Lahore.
Similar view has been taken in PLD 1951 B J 47.
6. In the light of what has been said above, it is concluded that there does not appear to be any sufficient cause for restoration of the appellants case which was dismissed for default at 2 p. m. On 15th July, 1975. In this view of the matter the appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. PLD 1966 Lah. 567