Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 1082 2019 SLD 1082 2019 PLJ 52
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Labour Appeal No. 56 of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 23.01.2019.
JUSTICE (R) SYED IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN SHAH, CHAIRMAN
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Muhammad Ashfaq Thaheem, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Abdul Razzaq Raja, Advocate

HAJI ABDUL QAYYUM

VS

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER/CEO MEPCO AND 2 OTHERS

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 3

Limitation Act, 1908 (IX of 1908)-- ----S. 3--Petitioner was serving as line foremane--Damaging of T.T Pole--Failing to make up report--Illegal gratification--Issuance of show cause notice--Compulsory retirement--Departmental appeal--Dismissed--Grievance petition--Dismissed--Limitation--Application for condonation of delay--Question of limitation cannot be considered a "technicality" simpliciter as it has got its own significance and would have substantial bearing on merits of case--Law of limitation is required to be followed strictly--Impugned is in accordance with law, same is hereby maintained--Appeal is without merits--Appeal was dismissed. 1990 SC 692, 1989 SCMR 1149 & 1989 SCMR 467, ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: JUSTICE (R) SYED IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN SHAH, CHAIRMAN---.--- The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 18.03.2017 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. X, Sahiwal whereby a grievance petition made by the appellant was dismissed. 2. The appellant who was inducted in WAPDA services in the year 1974 and was serving as Line Foreman-I at Chichawatni District Sahiwal, served with a show cause notice on 17.10.1998 on the following allegations:-- (i) "L.T pole No. 1 was damaged due to collusions of tractor trolley with the said pole two months ago and the petitioner failed to make report to the S.D.O and supply of electricity to the consumers feeding from the damaged pole remained disconnected causing a substantial loss of revenue. (ii) The meter installed in the name of one Mr. Mahood Chak No. 115/7-CR was disconnected by S.D.O. Chichawatni on 24.10.1997 due to the theft of electricity which was reinstalled by the petitioner next day of its disconnection after accepting illegal gratification of Rs. 2800/- from the consumer". The appellant submitted the reply thereof, he was personally heard but without holding regular inquiry he was retired compulsorily vide order dated 16.04.1999. The appellant preferred departmental appeal which remains un-responded. He preferred an appeal on 10.07.2009 against the penalty of the compulsorily retirement imposed upon him before Federal Service. Tribunal which abated…
🔒
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