AIRLINK 196.50 Increased By ▲ 2.94 (1.52%)
BOP 10.25 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (3.02%)
CNERGY 7.88 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.63%)
FCCL 39.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.85 (-2.09%)
FFL 17.09 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (1.36%)
FLYNG 27.12 Decreased By ▼ -0.63 (-2.27%)
HUBC 133.95 Increased By ▲ 1.37 (1.03%)
HUMNL 14.10 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (1.51%)
KEL 4.78 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (3.91%)
KOSM 6.64 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.3%)
MLCF 47.18 Decreased By ▼ -0.42 (-0.88%)
OGDC 214.79 Increased By ▲ 0.88 (0.41%)
PACE 6.96 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.43%)
PAEL 42.00 Increased By ▲ 0.76 (1.84%)
PIAHCLA 17.15 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PIBTL 8.50 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (1.07%)
POWER 9.60 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.41%)
PPL 183.96 Increased By ▲ 1.61 (0.88%)
PRL 42.90 Increased By ▲ 0.94 (2.24%)
PTC 25.15 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (1%)
SEARL 109.80 Increased By ▲ 2.96 (2.77%)
SILK 1.00 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (1.01%)
SSGC 44.11 Increased By ▲ 4.01 (10%)
SYM 17.86 Increased By ▲ 0.39 (2.23%)
TELE 8.96 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (1.36%)
TPLP 13.06 Increased By ▲ 0.31 (2.43%)
TRG 67.60 Increased By ▲ 0.65 (0.97%)
WAVESAPP 11.68 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (3.09%)
WTL 1.83 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (2.23%)
YOUW 3.97 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-2.46%)
BR100 12,249 Increased By 204.5 (1.7%)
BR30 36,933 Increased By 352.6 (0.96%)
KSE100 115,663 Increased By 1625.1 (1.43%)
KSE30 36,398 Increased By 603.9 (1.69%)

The Lahore High Court on Monday summoned acting general manager of Punjab Saaf Pani Company on September 16 and directed him to explain his position regarding allegations raised by the petitioners who were terminated by the company.
The petitioners Muhammad Amjad and others challenging their removal through Safdar Shaheen advocate contended that the company removed 132 employees on the pretext of financial crunch.
He said the company violated the conditions of the employment contract by terminating services of the petitioners.
He argued that the petitioners were appointed on project posts and their services could not be terminated till the completion of the project.
He also told the court that the acting general manager of the company had been extending threats to the petitioners since they filed the petition. He claimed that the acting general manager also told the petitioners that he would not submit any reply in the court.
He said the conduct of the officer amounted to contempt of court. The court after hearing the counsel said if allegations of the petitioners proved to be true the court would issue a contempt notice to the respondent acting general manager.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2018

Comments

Comments are closed.