LAHORE CARPET MANUFACTURING COMPANY vs MUHAMMAD JAMIL Ss — 2024 PLC 114 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

LAHORE CARPET MANUFACTURING COMPANY VS MUHAMMAD JAMIL Ss. 44 & 47(5)---Payment of Wage Act (IV of 1936), S.15---Revisional jurisdiction---Scope---Respondents / workmen were allowed recovery of their wages---Petitioner / employer was aggrieved of revisional jurisdiction exercised by Labour Appellate Tribunal---Validity---Labour Court constituted under S. 44 of Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010, is empowered to exercise and perform such other powers and functions as are or may be conferred upon or assigned to it by Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010, or any other law such as Payment Wages Act, 1936---Labour Court exercises jurisdiction over disputes beyond the purview of Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010---Labour Court under the command of S. 17 of Payment of Wages Act, 1936, is competent to hear appeals against Authority constituted under S. 15 of Payment of Wages Act, 1936---Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal constituted under S. 47 of Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010, exercises both appellate and revisional powers with respect to orders passed by Labour Court subject to various provisions of Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010---There is no bar upon any party in laying information before Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal in the form of a Revision Petition not as a matter of right but in the discretion of Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal which in turn may decide to assume revisional jurisdiction depending upon facts and circumstances of each case warranting exercise or otherwise of revisional jurisdiction---If Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal exercises its revisional powers, the Tribunal acts within its lawful revisional jurisdiction to examine correctness, legality or propriety of any order passed by Labour Court---Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal had revisional power with respect to an order passed by Labour Court in appeal preferred under S.17 of Payment of Wages Act, 1936---Mere signing of unilaterally prepared 'Final Settlement Forms' by respondents / workmen could not be regarded as final settlements in absence of their free consent---Respondents / workmen promptly agitated their grievances and were still pursuing the same---Mere receipt of partial amounts based upon calculations of petitioner / employer did not place any bar upon respondents / workmen to invoke law for redressal of their grievances---High Court declined to interfere in judgments passed by for a below as there was no illegality or infirmity or jurisdictional defect---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

LAHORE CARPET MANUFACTURING COMPANY vs MUHAMMAD JAMIL Ss — 2024 PLC 114 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC