Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 1152 2016 SLD 1152 2016 PLC 147
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Labour Appeal No. LHR-40 of 2015, decided on 12th October, 2015.
CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ, CHAIRMAN
Tanveer Ahmed Ghumman for Appellant. Riaz Hussain for
Respondent.

MUHAMMAD RASHEED

VS

H. OHASHI CHIEF (REPRESENTATION) OF TOYOTA TSUSHO CORPORATION

Law: Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010

Section: 33,47

Punjab Industrial Relations Act (XIX of 2010)--- ----Ss. 33 & 47---Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.1(4)(a) & S.0.12-Termination of service---Grievance petition-Dismissal of---Appellant/employee, who was appointed as Office Boy, his services were terminated---Grievance petition was dismissed by the Labour Court-Validity-Letter of appointment showed that service of the employee could be terminated by giving three months notice, or three months gross salary in lieu thereof---Appointment letter was signed by the employee; he accepted the terms and conditions of appointment---Employee had admitted that he had received his total dues as his final settlement---Employee also had admitted that in the office of the employer, only seven permanent employees were working---Relationship of the employee and employer was of "master and servant", because total strength of the employees in the office of the employer was seven (less than twenty employees)---Labour laws, were not applicable with relation to the grievance of the employee---Grievance petition, being not maintainable, was rightly dismissed by the Labour Court---In absence of any ambiguity and non-reading of evidence in the impugned , appeal was dismissed. JUDGMENT CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ, CHAIRMAN.--- Brief facts of the case are that on 05.04.1994 the appellant was appointed as Office Boy through confirmed appointment letter. The appellant never committed any misconduct or illegal act during his job. He also observed terms and conditions of service of appointment letter. On 21.08.2007 at 08.00 P.M, when the appellant completed his duty, he was called by the respondent in his office and without any allegation or show cause notice terminated the service of appellant by the company representative without mentioning any cogent justification. The appellant sent legal notice and grievance notice dated 25.08.2007 and 10.09.2007, in which it was prayed that the appellant may be reinstated with all back benefits. It was further stated that cause of action firstly arose to the appellant on 21.08.2007, when he was terminated from the job and secondly when company…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492