Law: Industrial Relations Ordinance, (XXIII of 1969)

Section: 38

(a) Industrial dispute  Termination of service - Show-cause notice - Private service - Employer, though, entitled to terminate service without assigning reason, yet, when cause- is assigned which amounts to misconduct a show-cause notice, held, essential. Karnaphully Paper Mills Limited v. Karnaphully Mills Workers' Union 1961 P L C 991 ref. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969) S. 38-- Appeal--Question: of fact not raised before Labour Court-Not allowed to be raised in appeal. Date of hearing: 26th August 1971.                                                                                                                                       DECISION This is an appeal against an award dated April 29, 1911, whereby the learned Labour Court came to the conclusion that the appellant was in permanent service of the respondent Company and, therefore, ho was entitled to one month's wages in lieu of notice. 2. Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi, the learned Representative for the appellant, contended that the services of the appellant having been terminated on the ground of misconduct an enquiry should have been held before his services were done away with. In other words, the contention of Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi is that appellant's case could not be of simple termination of service. The admitted position is that the notice dated 7th April 1970, does contain allegation which amounts to misconduct. The said notice terminating the services of the appellant states that in spite of the warning the appellant was not properly pressing the shirts of the respondent's clients and spoiling them. Mr. Masood Shaikh, the learned Representative for the respondent, candidly admitted that the ground mentioned in the notice would amount to misconduct. But relying on a case of Karnaphully Paper Mills Ltd. v. Karnaphully Mills…