| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1982 SLG 1679 1982 SLD 1679 1982 PLC 996 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Application No. KAR-34 of 1982, heard on 23rd February, 1982.
Z. A. CHANNA, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Application No. KAR-34 of 1982, heard on 23rd February, 1982.
Z. A. CHANNA, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
IQBAL BADRE ALAM
VS
ANWAR MUHAMMAD KHAN
Law:
Section:
Industrial dispute- --Domestic enquiry-Right of employer-Labour Courts should be slow to interfere. Complainant before Labour Court had challenged domestic enquiry against him by management Complaint was filed before vacation Judge (Labour Court) who passed the order since he was only vacation Judge hence it would be proper that the Court of competent jurisdiction should decide the matter on merits but further directed the management (accused in complaint) not to take any further action against the complainant till any further order is passed by the Court of competent jurisdiction. Such direction staying further action against complainant was passed without hearing the parties by Labour' Appellate Tribunal in exercise of suo mote revision powers under S. 38 (3-a) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. Held: Labour Court ought not to have issued a direction staying further action against the complainant party at least without hearing the parties in this behalf which appears not to have been done. It is the right of the employer to hold a domestic enquiry against any workman who is alleged to have committed a misconduct and Labour Courts should be slow to interfere with the exercise of that right. Of course, if the holding of the enquiry is found to be mala fide or in contravention of any provision of law or there are other cogent reasons for staying or prohibiting the holding of enquiry an appropriate order in this behalf could be passed but it is only in those limited cases that such an order should be passed. Since, in the instant case, none of the above circumstances had even been indicated, the direction to the management 'not to take further action would appear to be, to say the least, inappropriate. Naeem Bukhari for Applicants Sulaiman Habibullah for Respondent Date of hearing: 23rd February, 1982. DECISION The record and proceedings in complaint case No. 9 of 1981, which was originally filed before the vacation Judge (First Labour Court) and on the close of vacation was sent to the Court having jurisdiction (Fourth Labour Court), was summoned in the exercise of the suo motu powers of revision of this Tribunal to examine the legality, correctness and…
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