Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 966 1976 SLD 966 1976 PLC 928
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. ST-213 of 1976, decided on 9th September 1976.
M. JAMIL ASGHAR, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

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

MUHAMMAD ALAM

VS

MANAGING DIRECTOR ADIL BEVERAGE COMPANY LTD.

Law:

Section:

1976 P L C 928 [Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab] Present: M. Jamil Asghar, Appellate Tribunal MUHAMMAD ALAM Versus MANAGING DIRECTOR ADIL BEVERAGE COMPANY LTD. Appeal No. ST-213 of 1976, decided on 9th September 1976. (a) Industrial dispute---- -Domestic enquiry-Procedure-Should not be against principles of natural justice-Prosecution witnesses examined in absence of accused-Accused further not afforded chance to produce defence witnesses-Violation of principles of natural justice-Orders passed on basis of such enquiry set aside. Amulya Batan Mukherjee v. Deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer. Eastern Railway and others 1963 P L C 651 and Meenglas Tea Estate v. Their Workmen 1964 P L C 135 rel. (b) Industrial dispute---- Re-instatement-Back benefits-Dismissal order set aside due to defective enquiry-Workman on re-instatement, held, would be entitled to back benefits only if found not guilty in fresh enquiry if held by Management. Anwar Ali Chaudhry for Appellant. Muhammad Ali for Respondent. Date of hearing: 24th August 1916 JUDGMENT This is an appeal against the decision dated 15-6-1976 of Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore. 2. Muhammad Alam, appellant joined service as a Security Supervisor in May, 1970. On 1-1-1971 he was promoted as Junior Shipper. He and his Senior Shipper Muhammad Saleem were put in charge of the stock of empty bottles. On 11-8-1975 a physical checking was made and it was found that empties of the value of Rs. 15,000 were missing. On 12-8-1975 a charge-sheet was issued to both Muhammad Saleem and the appellant. In that charge-sheet the Management had already imposed a fine of Rs. 7,580.75 each on both Muhammad Saleem, Senior Shipper and the appellant. This charge-sheet did not disclose specifically the misconduct on the part of the appellant. In fact it was rather a vague charge-sheet. The appellant admitted the shortage of empty bottles but pleaded that the breakages had not been properly accounted for. On 22-8-1975 a letter Exh. P-3 was sent by the Management to the appellant to the effect that the explanation, submitted by him was unsatisfactory and he was asked to re-check the stock. There­ after second charge-sheet Exh. P-5 was issued to…
🔒
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