Case Details

Citation(s)
1981 SLG 2100 1981 SLD 2100 1981 PLC 210
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-9 of 1980, heard on 22nd January, 1980.
Z. A. CHANNA, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

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

GHULAM MEHDI

VS

MESSRS HASHMI CAN COMPANY LTD., KARACHI

Law:

Section:

Industrial dispute­---- --- Domestic enquiry-Notices issued at given address and. also pub­lished in newspapers of wide circulation-Service in circumstances, held, could safely be presumed-Plea of non-service rejected. Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for Appellant. Date of hearing 22nd January, 1980. ORDER This appeal is directed against a decision by the learned IInd Labour Court, given on 8th- December, 1979, dismissing the grievance application of the appellant workman. 2. The appellant, who was a permanent workman in the respondent establishment was granted one month's leave with effect from 23rd May, 1977, in order to visit his native place in Baltistan. As he failed to report for duty on the expiry of his leave, his services were terminated by the respondent establishment with effect from 10th October, 1977. The appellant challenged his dismissal orders before the learned Labour Court which rejected his claim and upheld the orders of dismissal. 3. I have heard Mr. Ashraf Hussain Rizvi, the learned Representative for the appellant, and have also carefully gone through the record of the learned Labour Court. Mr. Ashraf Hussain assailed tile impugned order of the learned Labour Court on the grounds-(a) that no domestic enquiry was held in respect of the appellant. (b) that Dither due notice of the charge-sheet other holding of enquiry was given to the appellant nor were the second show-cause notice and dismissal orders sent to the appel­lant at his correct address, and (3) that approval of the employer was not obtained to the appellant's dismissal. 4. In order to appreciate the above contentions, it might be mention­ed that the case of the appellant is that during the period of his leave, he fell ill at his native place and accordingly sent one application for extension of leave from his native place and 2 more such applications from Rawalpindi where he had gone for treatment. The appellant further claims that he had furnished medical certificate to respondent-Company in support of his plea that he had fallen ill but his plea was disregarded and he was orally informed that his services had been terminated. The case of the respondent-Company, on the other hand, is that…
🔒
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