Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 921 1976 SLD 921 1976 PLC 779
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab

SAEED AHMAD, PRESIDING OFFICER

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

CRESCENT TEXTILE MILLS LTD.

VS

KHALIQ-UZZAMAN

Law:

Section:

1976 P L C 779 [Labour Court Punjab] Present: Saeed Ahmad, Presiding Officer CRESCENT TEXTILE MILLS LTD. versus KHALIQ-UZ-ZAMAN Appeal No. 388 of 1974, decided on 13th January 1975. (a) Industrial dispute--- Domestic enquiry-Must be independent-Person eye-witness of occurrence-Such person cannot be an independent Inquiry Officer ­West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. O. 15. (b) Industrial dispute---- --Domestic enquiry-Enquiry Officer brushing aside totally defence evidence Findings of enquiry, in circumstances, held, perverse. Abdul Latif for Appellant. Syed Zafar Rizvi for Respondent. JUDGMENT The respondent, Khaliq-uz-Zaman was dismissed from service by his employer, the Crescent Textile Mills, Lyallpur. He filed an application under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 and obtained an order of re-instatement with back benefits. The employer has filed this appeal. The charge against employee was that on 16th December 1973, Manzoor Hussain, Production Incharge and Muhammad Sadiq, weaver quarrelled with each other, that the respondent making capital out of this minor incident made a fiery speech before the workers, instigated them to close the weaving section and thereby the said section remained close from 2:30 p.m. to 4-00 p .m. In the charge-sheet it was stated that the employee was guilty of wilful insubordination or disobedience, riotous or disorderly behaviour and striking work or inciting others to strike work. Malik Sarfraz, Personnel Officer of the employer was appointed as Inquiry Officer. He recorded evidence of 6 witnesses on behalf of prosecution. Their evidence was that after the incident of quarrelling between Manzoor and Sadiq respondent made a speech inciting other workers to strike work till justice was done to Sadiq, that he led the workers to the office where the worker wanted to manhandle Manzoor and then the Manager pacified the workers by suspending Manzoor and so thereafter the work was restar­ted. According to this evidence the work remained close for 11 hours. In defence one Muhammad Shafi was examined. After close of his statement 77 workers appeared before…
🔒
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