Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 1554 2011 SLD 1554 2011 PLC 61
Labour Appellate Tribunal
Labour Appeal No.7 of 2009, decision dated: 18-10-2010.
ABDUL AZIZ KUNDI, 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

Labour Appellate Tribunal MUKHTAR AHMAD

VS

Messrs HABIB BANK LTD. through President, MUKHTAR AHMAD vs Messrs HABIB BANK LTD. through President,

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Act (IV of 2008)-------Ss. 41 & 54(3)(i)---Habib Bank Limited Staff Service Rules, 1981, R.37---Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.O.15(2), (3)(a)(1)---Compulsory retirement--Grievance petition---Appeal---Penalty of compulsory retirement from service was imposed by the employers on employee after issuing him show-cause notice and holding enquiry on the basis of allegations of loose administration, negligence and concealment of facts---Employee was provided a fair chance to produce his further evidence, but he did not opt to do so; and certain admissions in his cross-examination, would show that employee in fact had admitted the charges levelled against him---Findings so recorded by the Labour Court on grievance petition, in circumstances, were not open to any exception and same were maintained---However, employee was employed in the bank for more than 26 years and nothing was on record to show anything except for charges in the present case---Employee was never censured for any act of his omission and commission during his entire career---Under sub-clause (i) of clause 3 of Standing Order 15 of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, a habitual negligence or neglect of work had been termed to be misconduct, but compulsory retirement was not provided as punishment under Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968---Punishment of compulsory retirement awarded to the employee, who had a long association with the employer bank for more than 26 years, appeared to be harsh---Awarding of punishment of reduction to a lower grade by one step, would adequately meet the ends of justice in view of the charges of which employee was proved guilty---Punishment from compulsory retirement, was converted into reduction into a lower grade by one step. Crescent Jute Products Ltd. Jaranwala v. Muhammad Yaqoob and others PLD 1978 SC 207; Ghulam Muhammad v. Government of Punjab through Secretary, Industrials Lahore and others 2000 SCMR 30; Bank Limited v. Musaddiq Hussain and 2 others 1992 PLC 110 and Auditor General Pakistan and others v. Muhammad Ali and others 2006 SCMR 60 ref. Fazl-e-Rabbi…
🔒
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