Case Details

Citation(s)
1978 SLG 1004 1978 SLD 1004 1978 PLC 212
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Petition No. 90 of 1976, decided on 30th March 1976
RAI ABDUR RAZZAQUE KHAN 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

MUHAMMAD AZAM

VS

NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN, GUJRANWALA

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)------ -----S. 25-A---Re-instatement----(Employee of National Bank of Pakistan)---Terms and conditions of appointment of workmen not guaranteeing right to come to Court for re-instatement dismissed. Zafar Salim for Petitioner. Abdul Hamid for Respondent ORDER Brief facts necessary for the disposed of this appeal are that -vide appointment order, dated 10th November 1974, by the Vice-President of National Bank of Pakistan petitioner was appointed as temporary Godown Keeper for 6 months with the condition that his services could be terminated earlier without notice. His services could be terminated on 10th March 1975. Against this grievance he came this Court. Evidence in this case was recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Junior Labour Court. His services were terminated by the Manager of Alipur Chatha Bus Stand Branch. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended in the first place that Staff Services Rules 1973, are applicable to the employees of National Bank of Pakistan and according to those rules there is no concept of temporary appointment and at the same time services off an employee could only be terminated by the appointing authority and in this respect he has placed a photostat copy of an order passed by me in my appellate jurisdiction in case National Bank of Pakistan v. Pervaiz. This is a case of similar nature except that in the cited case respondent had served for more than 6 months whereas in the instant case services of the petitioner have been terminated before completion of 6 months service. Learned counsel for the respondent has argued the case from a different prospective than in the cited case. Learned counsel for the respondent…
🔒
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