Legal Case Summary

Case Details
Case ID 439a3494-db72-4651-bbd6-dc9fa16d2e90
Body View case body.
Case Number LHR-256 of 1981
Decision Date Jul 09, 1983
Hearing Date Jul 04, 1983
Decision The appeal was dismissed as the evidence presented by the respondent clearly established that he had opted for pensionary benefits prior to his retirement. The original option letter was not available, but a photocopy was submitted, which was validated by the signatures of the Station Master. The Labour Court's decision to accept the grievance petition was upheld, as the appellant failed to justify the disallowance of pension benefits. The case highlighted the importance of proper documentation and adherence to procedural requirements in industrial disputes.
Summary In this pivotal case decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, the key issue revolved around the pensionary benefits of a railway worker, Muhammad Sadiq. The worker claimed he had opted for pension benefits before his retirement, supported by a photocopy of the option letter. The Tribunal found that despite the original document being misplaced, the evidence was sufficient to affirm the worker's claim. The decision emphasized the significance of maintaining accurate records and the rights of employees in industrial disputes. This case serves as a crucial reference for similar pension-related claims in labor law, reinforcing employee rights and procedural compliance. With keywords like 'pension benefits', 'industrial dispute', 'Labour Court', and 'employee rights', this case is relevant for legal practitioners and scholars focusing on labor law and industrial relations.
Court Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Entities Involved Not available
Judges Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi
Lawyers S. Muhammad Naqi, Kh. Tariq Masood
Petitioners DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, LAHORE
Respondents MUHAMMAD SADIQ
Citations 1984 SLD 1529, 1984 PLC 922
Other Citations Not available
Laws Involved Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969
Sections 25-A, 38 (3)