| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 659 2016 SLD 659 2016 PLC 52 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. HYD-610 of 2011, decided on 28th September, 2015. Date of hearing: 26th August, 2015.
ALI SAIN DINO METLO, MEMBER
Mehmood Hussain Siddiqui for Appellant. Sajjad A. Chandio for
Respondents.
Appeal No. HYD-610 of 2011, decided on 28th September, 2015. Date of hearing: 26th August, 2015.
ALI SAIN DINO METLO, MEMBER
Mehmood Hussain Siddiqui for Appellant. Sajjad A. Chandio for
Respondents.
WASEEM ANWAR UJAN
VS
Messrs KHUSHALI BANK LTD. through President and 4 others
Law: Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013
Section: 34,48
Sindh Industrial Relations Act (XXIX of 2013)--- ----Ss. 34 & 48---Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.2(i) & S.O.15(4)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.11---Resignation without giving one month's prior notice---Dismissal from service---Employee, who was appointed in the Bank as Customer Service (Trainee), tendered his resignation on the ground that he had been offered a better job---Employer Bank, instead of accepting resignation of the employee, dismissed him from service on the ground that he had resigned without giving one month's prior notice---Employee while tendering his resignation, had disclosed the reason for resignation i.e. offer of a better job---Labour Court, while holding the employee to be a "workman", upheld his dismissal for the same reason i.e. tendering resignation without one month's prior notice---Validity---Orders of the Bank and the Labour Court were not sustainable, for the reasons; that employment contract did not provide consequence of not giving one month's prior notice, condition of notice could not be treated as mandatory; that according to S.O.15(4) of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, a workman could be dismissed only on proof of charge of misconduct, and want of one month's prior notice, would not come within the purview of misconduct; that under Art.11 of the Constitution, forced labour was prohibited, and no person could be compelled to perform compulsory service unless required so by law---Refusal to accept resignation of the employee without any charge of misconduct against him, would amount to forcing him to do compulsory service---No law required the employee to do service of the Bank compulsorily---Employer Bank had not claimed that it had suffered any loss due to resignation of the employee without one month's prior notice---At the time of tendering his resignation, the employee had no portfolio---Manager of the concerned branch of the Bank had also no objection on the resignation of employee and had recommended it for acceptance---Labour Court grossly erred in not accepting the grievance application of the employee---Order of the…
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