Case Details

Citation(s)
1984 SLG 1574 1984 SLD 1574 1984 PLC 979
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. LHR-176 of 1980, decided on 28th June, 1982.
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

SUPERINTENDENT POST OFFICES, LAHORE DIVISION

VS

MUHAMMAD YASIN

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)- --- S. 1 (4) and Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 2 (xxviii), 25-A & 38 (3)-Post offices-Being run by Govern­ment-Employees of post offices governed by Civil Servants Rules-Not within ambit of West Pakistan Industrial and Commer­cial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968-Postman­Covered by cl. (xiii), Sched. II read with S. 2 (n) of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 hence ousted from definition of "civil servant" under S. 2 (b) of Civil Servants Act, 1973-Being a workman within jurisdiction of Labour Court-Dismissal from service under Government Servants Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1973 challenged before Labour Court-No proof that enquiry held properly with opportunity to accused to cross-examine witnesses ­Labour Court in circumstances, held, rightly awarded re-instatement allowing the department to make fresh enquiry. - Zia Mahmood Mirza for Appellant. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing : 14th June, 1982. JUDGMENT This appeal arises from the decision dated 5th February, 1980 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 3, Lahore at Ferozewala, whereby the grievance petition of the respondent was accepted and he was directed to be re-instated in service without back benefits, observing that the order passed by him would not debar the appellant from holding fresh enquiry against the respondent on the same charge, if otherwise not forbidden by any law. 2. The respondent was a postman at Sharakpur and the allegation against him is that on 27th April, 1976 he without any authority opened a parcel containing answer books of the Intermediate Examination. A preliminary enquiry was made and, thereafter, the respondent was charge ­sheeted. The learned trial Judge has re-instated the respondent on the sole ground that the enquiry was made under the Efficiency and Discipline Rules and not under the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968, although he held that otherwise the enquiry was properly made. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that Stan­ding Orders Ordinance, 1963 is not applicable according to…
🔒
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