Law:

Section:

Industrial dispute---- ---Misconduct---Negligence---Omnibus conductor charged of non­ issuance of tickets to passengers for about 6 miles without charging are-Contention that it could amount to negligence only and not o misconduct warranting removal from service because solitary act of negligence cannot be treated as habitual negligence amounting to misconduct-Question whether such act was negligence or misconduct held, depends upon facts of each case-Conduct of petitioner, held, created doubt and smelt of guilty intention for misappropriation. Application for re-instatement, in circumstances, held, rightly rejected by Junior Labour Court. Rdja Abdul Qayyum for Appellant. Saadullah Mumtaz for Respondent. ORDER This is an appeal preferred against an order dated 8-7-75 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Junior Labour Court Rawalpindi on a petition of the appellant filed under section 25-A of the I. R. O., 1969 for re-instatement. His petition was rejected, hence this appeal. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the record of the Junior Labour Court as well as the impugned order. 3. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that appellant was a Conductor with the respondent. On 11-11-74 his bus was checked at Golra Station. 16 passengers were found without tickets. At the same time appellant had not charged any thing from them up till checking of his bus. Those 16 passengers boarded from Raja Bazar from where the bus started. Golra Station is said to be at a distance of 5/6 miles…

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