| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1984 SLG 1030 1984 SLD 1030 1984 PLC 125 |
National Industrial Relations Commission
Cases Nos. 24 (142) and 4 (150) of 1983, decided on 7th August, 1983
MAHMOOD AKHTAR, MEMBER
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Cases Nos. 24 (142) and 4 (150) of 1983, decided on 7th August, 1983
MAHMOOD AKHTAR, MEMBER
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
GULZBAGH RABBANI
VS
DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYSAND 2 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)- -- S. 25-A(1)-Service of grievance notice-Collective Bargaining Agent being representative of workman does not enjoy any legal status of its own-Cannot serve grievance notice without consent of aggrieved workman-Notice served by C.B.A. treated as notice served by workman. (b) Industrial dispute---- --- Termination of service-When does order of termination becomes effective-Normally as soon as charge of post relinquished or handed over in consequence of termination order-Relinquishment or handing over charge where charge of stores etc. is to be given--Obligation of workman-Termination would become implemented as soon as workman is discharged of such obligation by employer-Workman avoiding to relinquish or hand over charge mala fide thus avoiding to discharge his obligation cannot carry any premium and such failure would not confer any right of continuity in service-Impugned termination challenged by workman in his grievance notice served through C.B.A. and also appended with grievance petition-Termination order in circumstances, held, had been received by workman prior to filing grievance petition-Practice of handing over charge at end of working shift in vogue-Contention that charge of stores with him having not been handed over he continued to be in service, in circumstances, rejected and severance of relationship as workman and employer had already taken place for purposes of stay application Application for status quo ante, in circumstances, dismissed-Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 25-A read with National Industrial Relations Commission (Procedure and Functions) Regulations, 1973, para 32 (1). Gulzar Begum v. SataraBibi 1972 S C M R 251 and Nawab Din v. Rafiq Ahmad P L D 1979 Note 94 at p. 67 distinguished. Asmat Kumal Khan for Petitioners. Naeem Bokhari and Mirza Saleem Beg for Respondents. ORDER The petitioner a Platform Inspector Grade II was appointed on 7th January, 1981 by the Chairman, Railway Board allegedly on the basis of his merit in sports etc. His services were terminated on 10th July, 1983 by the Divisional Personnel Officer Pakistan Railways Lahore. The reason…
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