| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 6237 2024 SLD 6237 = 2024 PLC 278 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 307-K of 2023, decided on 10th June, 2024. (Against the judgment dated 22.11.22 passed by High Court of Sindh at Karachi, in C.P. No. D-255 of 2022).
Present: Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Irfan Saadat Khan, JJ
Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhary, Advocate-on-Record/Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
Civil Petition No. 307-K of 2023, decided on 10th June, 2024. (Against the judgment dated 22.11.22 passed by High Court of Sindh at Karachi, in C.P. No. D-255 of 2022).
Present: Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Irfan Saadat Khan, JJ
Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhary, Advocate-on-Record/Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
SAKHIB ZAR
VERSUS
Messrs K-ELECTRIC LIMITED and others
Law: Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968
Section: VI,15
Law: Industrial Relations Act, 2012
Section: X,48,58
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3)
(a) Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VIof 1968)-------S.O. 15---Punishments---Quantum---Scope---As soon as act of misconduct is established and employee is found guilty after due process of law, it is the prerogative of employer to decide quantum of punishment, out of various penalties provided in law.(b) Administration of justice-------Arbitrary relief---Court, jurisdiction of---Scope---No Court has any jurisdiction to grant arbitrary relief without support of any power granted by the Constitution or law.(c) Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012)-------Ss. 48 & 58---Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.O. 15---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Termination from service---Ten days' absence without leave---Misconduct--Awarding of punishment---Object, purpose and scope---Petitioner/workman was terminated from service for being absent from duty without leave for a period of more than ten days---Trial forum did not consider absence for such period as misconduct therefore, reinstated the petitioner/workman in service---Lower Appellate Forum set aside order of reinstatement and High Court maintained that order---Validity---National Industrial Relation Commission (Trial forum) in its original order overturned the law and ordered reinstatement but it did not keep in mind doctrine of proportionality and reasonableness and modified act of misconduct from 10 days' absence to 15 days' absence---Full Bench of National Industrial Relation Commission (Lower Appellate Forum) rightly set aside such order in appeal which was affirmed by High Court---Addressing of misconduct aids, keeps an eye on and protects wellbeing of the organization and its employees in order to make sure that the workplace is in a trouble free environment---It is prerogative and inherent right of employer to trigger disciplinary proceedings in accordance with law to address misconduct, if committed by any employee but course of action for encountering any act of misconduct should stick to the principle of natural justice and the set of guidelines provided…