Case Details

Citation(s)
1982 SLG 1421 1982 SLD 1421 1982 PLC 145
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-434 of 1981, decided on 28th September, 1981..
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

ABDUL HAMEED

VS

HOTEL INTER-CONTINENTAL, KARACHIJANU ANOTHER

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)- ----S. O. 15 (3) (a)-Misconduct-Habitual absence-Workman re­maining absent without leave on 25 occasions during span of six months-Absence continued for 2 to 4 days on four of such occa­sions-Charge of misconduct of habitual absence, in circumstances, held, valid and dismissal order not exceptionable. Mohammad Jamil v. General Manager, Army Welfare Food Indus­tries, Faisalabad, 1980 P L C 1183 distinguished. Shero alias Sher Mohammad v. State P L D 1978 Kar. 368 ref M. L. Shahani for Appellant. Date of hearing; 28thSeptember, 1981. DECISION The appellant, who was employed as a Tandoor Wala in the Hotel Intercontinental, Karachi, the respondents herein, was dismissed from service by order, dated 6th February, 1980, on the charge of habitual absence. The dismissal order, which was published in a local newspaper of 9th February, 1980, was based on a domestic enquiry in which the appellant himself had admitted that he had been absent on a number of occasion during the period from May, 1979 to October, 1979. The appellant challenged the orders of his dismissal before the learned Fifth Labour Court and took a number of pleas in support of his contention that the said orders were invalid, including the plea that the orders of his dismissal were .not issued by his employer or even with the approval of his employer. The learned Labour Court has dismissed the appellants griev­ance petition and has repelled his various contentions. The appellant has accordingly, come up in appeal before this Tribunal. 2. Mr. M.L. Shahani, the learned counsel for the appellant sought to assail the impugned decision of the learned Labour Court on the ground that absence from his duties of the appellant did not constitute habitual absence without leave for the purposes of sub-clause (e) of clause (3) of Standing Order 15 and consequently the order of dismissal from service of the appellant cannot be sustained. In support of his conten­tion the learned counsel relied upon the decision of a learned Single Member of the N. 1. R. C. in the case of Mohammad Jamil v. General Manager, Army Welfare Food…
🔒
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