Case Details

Citation(s)
1984 SLG 1194 1984 SLD 1194 1984 PLC 491
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. LHR/ 1157 of 1978, heard on 9th May, 1982.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, 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

AMAN ULLAH

VS

PUNJAB URBAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)---- -- Ss. 37 & 38 read with Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLI, r. 27-Additional evidence at appellate stage-Permissible if necessary for correct decision-Documents sought to be produced as additional evidence not advancing case of appellant and not required for correct decision of appeal-Not allowed. Ch. Riasat Ali and Ch. Khalid Farooq for Appellant. Syed Noor Ahmad for Respondent. Date of hearing : 9th May, 1982. JUDGMENT This appeal arises from the decision, dated 9th December, 1978 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore, where­by the grievance petition of the appellant was dismissed. 2. The appellant was appointed in 1966 as conductor and was promot­ed as Duty Clerk in 1975. He was in Kot Lakhpat Depot of the Punjab Urban Transport Corporation when vide order, dated 19th September, 1978, copy of which is Exh. P-1, was transferred to the post of Time Checker. He challenged the said order in his grievance petition on the grounds that it amounted to change in his category and that the D1strict Manager who passed the order was not competent to do so. He also urged that since he was Press Secretary of Alfateh Mazdoor League, he was transferred to restrain him from his union activities. His case is that as Duty Clerk he was performing duties in the office to detail the conductors on route and to maintain their attendance, whereas in the capacity as Time Checker he shall have to maintain record of buses running on routes at different parts in the town and to note down the running time of buses in order to find out if the drivers. perform duties according to the scheduled time. According to the difference in the nature of duties, he says that his category stands changed by the transfer. In support of his case the appellant appeared as P. W. 1. In cross-examination he admitted that line of promo­tion from conductor is to the post of Time Checker or Duty Clerk or Ticket Issuing Clerk, or the Time Keeper and that all these posts belong to the traffic staff. He also admitted that a joint seniority l1st is maintained of the above-mentioned employees and the senior most…
🔒
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