Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial dispute-Domestic enquiry-Court to find out Service whether domestic enquiry was fair and impartial West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance (IV of 1968), S. 38. (b) Industrial dispute-Domestic enquiry-Evidence-Enquiry Officer can accept statement of prosecution witness in preference to that of accused and his defence witness. Date of hearing: 19th September 1970.   DECISION This is an appeal against an award dated 1st May 1970, whereby the learned Labour Court dismissed the application of the appellant under section 38 of the West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1968 (hereinafter called the repealed Ordinance), on the ground that there was no violation of section 37 of the repealed Ordinance. The facts giving rise to the appeal briefly put are these. 2. The bus of the appellant was checked on 12th February 1969. He was charge-sheeted on 15th February 1969, and submitted his reply thereto on 22nd February 1969. Mr. Arz Mohammad Abro was appointed Enquiry Officer. After recording the evidence of Mr. Mohammad Siddiq, the Checker, and that of Mr. Jan Mohammad, on behalf of the appellant and the statement of the appellant himself, the Enquiry Officer held the appellant to be guilty of misconduct for which he was charge-sheeted. 3. Mohammad Siddiq, Traffic Assistant, had checked the bus of the appellant at Pannu Aqil. He found that 8 persons were travelling from Sanghi to Pannu Aqil and were without tickets and that the appellant had realized fare from them. 4. Before the learned Labour Court, Mohammad Siddiq and the Enquiry Officer appeared for the Department while the appellant examined himself in defence. 5. In the first place, Mr. A. Majeed, the learned Represen tative for the appellant contended that Mohammad Siddiq did not take down the statement of the appellant on T. T. 40 Form. The factual position is that a statement, which purports to be that of the appellant, Saeed Khan, was taken down on T. T. 40 Form. According to Mohammad Siddiq, the appellant refused to put his signature thereon, but Mohammad Siddiq took the signature of the Driver thereunder. It is not believable as to why Mohammad Siddiq would not like to observe the…