MUHAMMAD YAQOOB vs THE PIONEER STEEL MILLS. MURIDKE and others
This matter originated as a petition for special leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had declined to interfere with an order passed by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner, a former Security Inspector at Pioneer Steel Mills, had his services terminated and subsequently sought reinstatement by filing a petition under Section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. While the Labour Court initially accepted the petition and ordered reinstatement, the Labour Appellate Tribunal set aside this decision. The core legal question addressed was whether the High Court correctly refused to exercise its constitutional jurisdiction regarding the Tribunal's order, specifically concerning the issue of limitation. The Supreme Court examined the findings of both the appellate authority and the High Court regarding the limitation period. Holding that there was no merit in the petitioner's contention that he was unaware of the termination order, the Supreme Court affirmed that the lower courts had correctly adjudicated the matter. Consequently, the Court found no grounds to grant leave to appeal, thereby upholding the dismissal of the petitioner's claim.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to interfere with an order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal regarding the issue of limitation?
- Can a petition under Section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 be maintained if the issue of limitation has been thoroughly examined by the lower appellate authority?
- Section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969
ORDER
1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, J.--Muhammad Yaqoob son of Ali Muhammad, resident of House No, 28, Street No, 6, Guru Mangat, Gulberg-III, Lahore, was working in Pioneer Steel Mills, Muridke Distrtict Sheikhupura as Security Inspector. His services were terminated on 19/20-9-1978. He served a grievance notice to the employers. Thereafter he filed a petition under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 in the Punjab Labour Court No,
3. Petition was accepted. The Labour Court ordered reinstatement of the petitioner with full benefits.
2. ' On appeal by the employers to the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal, the decision of the Labour Court No, 3 was set aside. Muhammad Yaqoob then invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court. He was not successful there. Hence this petition for special leave to appeal.
3. ' The High Court declined to interfere with the order of the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal on the ground that it was not without jurisdiction. An attempt was made by the learned counsel to convince us that the petitioner was not aware of the order of termination. The moment he came to know of it, he resorted to appropriate legal remedy.
4. The question of limitation was thoroughly examined both by the appellate authority as well as the High Court. We have also looked into this. There is no force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence it is not a fit case for leave to appeal. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.