| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1973 SLG 3044 = 1973 SLD 3044 = 1973 PLC 142 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Quetta
Application No. 104 of 1972, decided on 11th August 1972.
Presented By: Abdul Qaderr, Chairman, Bilgrami and Irshad Rana, Members
Hayat Pasha, General Secretary, W. P. Railway Workers' Union for Applicant.
Application No. 104 of 1972, decided on 11th August 1972.
Presented By: Abdul Qaderr, Chairman, Bilgrami and Irshad Rana, Members
Hayat Pasha, General Secretary, W. P. Railway Workers' Union for Applicant.
Mrs. NUSRAT AZIZ
VERSUS
THE MEDICAL. SUPERINTENDENT, P. W. R., QUETTA AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
Industrial dispute---Termination of service---Temporary employee-Cannot be removed without observing formalities laid down in rules-Railway employee case-Appointment letter envi saging that service was liable to termination if work not found satisfactory without any notice or pay in lieu thereof and employee would not be entitled to any notice or pay in lieu thereof In case services were terminated for misconduct or inefficiency---Rules requiring that when on employee completes 12 months' service and probationary period was over normal procedure shall be ebsered in case of discharge as a disciplinary measure-Applicant having served for 21 months removal from service on account of miscon duct without show-cause notice on plea of contents of appointment order-No estoppel against statute---Contents of appointment letter, held, not relevant as against provisions of rules-Case, held, not covered by Note (I)(a) under r. 4;4 ;i)(e) of Railway Servants (Effi ciency and Discipline) Rules, 161 bur governed by r. 2(viii)of P. W. R. Personnel Manual, Advance Chapter No. S (Rules Regu lations Discipline and Rights of Appeal of Non-Gazetted Railway Servants)-P. W. R. Personnel Manul, advance Chapter No. 3, r. 2(viii) read with Railway Servants (Efficieney and Discipline) Rules, 1961, r. 4(4), Vote (i)(a). P L D 1965 S C 20 rel. ORDER ABDUL QADEER (CHAIRMAN).---The petitioner was appointed as a `B' Grade Nurse on 5-9-70 temporarily at a monthly salary of Rs. 175. On 24-6-72 the respondent ho. I served a notice of termination from service upon the petitioner without any show cause notice. The petitioner therefore prays that the order of termination of her services is illegal and without any lawful authority. The respondent contested the…