Case Details

Citation(s)
1982 SLG 1683 1982 SLD 1683 1982 PLC 1001
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-305 of 1982, heard on 14th July, 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

Syed NAEEM HUSSAIN

VS

PAKISTAN MACHINE TOOL FACTORY

Law:

Section:

Industrial dispute- -- Misconduct-Absence from duty for period exceeding ten day -Inability to attend due to reasons beyond control-To be established by accused workman-Bare word of accused that Doctor of Establishment had advised orally for rest in presence of fitness certificate by some doctor, held, rightly not relied. Qazi Khalid Ali for Appellant. Date of hearing: 14th July, 1982. DECISION The appellant, who was employed as a Machinist in the Pakistan Machine Tool Factory Limited, the respondents herein, was served with a show-cause It notice, dated 14th June, 1931, requiring him to explain why he failed to attend to his duties with effect from 5th May, 1981, onwards, despite the fact that he had been found, on medical check-up by the S. M. O. of the respondents, to be fit to report for duty. In his explana­tion, the appellant submitted that the medical officer had advised him to have rest and to wait for further instructions from him. He, however, did not produce any slip or authority from the S. M. O. As his explana­tion was not found satisfactory and was not supported by the report of the S. M. O. the management held a domestic enquiry against the appel­lant in which M. R. Kashfi, Senior Clerk of the respondent, was examined on behalf of the respondent and the appellant examined himself. It may be noted here that the appellant did not cross examine M. R. Kashfi though he was given an opportunity to do so and hence the evidence of, this witness stands unrebutted. Even in his own statement the appellant has admitted that on 4th May, 1981, when he reported to the S. M. O., he was not in an injured state or ill. He admitted that he continued to remain absent from his duties until the receipt of the show-cause notice, dated 14th July, 1981, without permission because he had been asked by the S. M. O. to have rest until further instructions. No evidence was produced by the appellant in support of the so-called advice tendered to him by the doctor. On the basis of the report of the Enquiry Officer, who found the charges against the appellant established, the appellant was dismissed from service vide order, dated 23rd September, 1981. 2. The appellant preferred…
🔒
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