Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 1086 1976 SLD 1086 1976 PLC 429
Sindh High Court
Writ Petition No. 509 of 1975, 8th March, 1976
ZAKAULLAH LODHI, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Messrs Dawood Cotton Mills Ltd.

VS

Presiding Officer, Iv Sind Labour Court, Karachi And 2 Others

Law:

Section:

Keywords: Charge-Sheet, Prima Facie, Writ Jurisdiction, Notice, Domestic Enquiry, Petition, Manager, Labour Court, Misreading Of Evidence, Order, Interference, Grounds, Determination, Petitioner, Intervention, Examination, Jurisdiction, Dismissal From Service, Grievance, Costs, Call, Copy, Show-Cause Notice, Consideration, Production, Constitution Of Pakistan, Provisions, Enquiry Officer, Defence, Constitutional Petition, Constitution, Evidence, Prejudice, Trade Union, Place, Natural Justice, Parties, Appointment Result: Petition dismissed JUDGMENT In this constitutional petition the petitioner have challenged the order of the residing Officer of Sind Labour Court No. IV, Karachi, dated 14th May 1975, whereby he upheld the order of the Junior Labour Court No. II, Karachi, dated 14th February. 1975, re-instating the third respondent in service with back benefits. 2. The brief facts forming the background of this case are that the third respondent was employed with the petitioners. It is alleged by the petitioners that on 25th October, 1974, he carob to the 1401. At 4 p. m. And raised slogans which were detrimental to the interest of the petitioners and also incited the workers to adopt go-slow tactics in the production. The Supervisor of the Mill namely Shahzad Ali remonstrated him and asked him to refrain from indulging in such activities upon which lie picked up a quarrel with him and abused and insulted him. He also threatened him of beating inside and out side the Mill and threw a roller at him, However, with the intervention of some persons the situation was brought under control. The third respondent is said to have left the Mill immediately after creating this ugly situation. 3. On the following day the petitioner; served the third respondent with a show-cause notice which was replied by the third respondent the same day. In his reply he repudiated all the allegations levelled against him and said that no such incident took place in the Mill, An enquiry officer was appointed on 29th October 1974 who conducted the enquiry. In his statement before the enquiry officer the third respondent stated that he had attended the factory on 25th October 1974 but…
🔒
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