Case Details

Citation(s)
1984 SLG 1611 1984 SLD 1611 1984 PLC 1029
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. FD-145 of 1982, decided on 30th November, 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

MUHAMMAD ASLAM

VS

UNITED BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER

Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial dispute-- -- Domestic enquiry-Evidence-Accused not given opportunity of cross-examining material witness-Statement of such witness cannot be used against accused. (b) Industrial dispute- -- Bank employee-Dismissed for misconduct-Allegation of giving information about balance of account holder to unauthorised person-No rule describing same as misconduct--Dismissal order, in circumstances, held, not sustainable. Muhammad Ahmad Javed for Appellant. Syed Fida Hussain Shah for Respondent. Date of hearing : 16th November, 1982. JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the decision, dated 30th January, 1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Punjab Labour Court No. 5, Faisalabad, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his reinstate­ment in service was dismissed. 2. The facts are that the fraud of Rs. 77,000 was committed in Zonal Office of the United Bank Limited, Sargodha and Muhammad Jameel and some other officers of the appellant were charge-sheeted. The charge­sheet given to -the appellant is Exh. P. 1 and the reply is Exh. P. 2. The charges are as under :- (a) While posting the bogus cheques No. C-03/216875 for Rs. 37,000 and C-03/216817 for Rs. 40,000 in C. D. Accounts Nos. 4182 and 4436, respectively, you failed to check the prefix numbers of these cheques. Hence, you defaulted in performing your duties properly. Rather your collaboration and connivance is suspected. (b) Further in C. D. A. C. No. 4436 you issued Customer's position of statement of account to some Mr. Muhammad Zafar and indicated in our own handwriting that it was being issued on the strength of an authority letter which is not available in the branch. As a matter of fact no authority letter was issued by the party. Thus, you disclosed the balance of an account to an unauthorised person which is not allowed under the Bank's rules. The chances of your own involvement in the matter cannot be ruled out. (c) The cheque No. C-03/216817 for Rs. 40,000 of C. D. A/C No. 4436 was posted by you in the ledger card on 3rd February, 1981. The said cheque was returned unpaid on the same day. You did not reverse the posting of the cheque from the ledger card and got the…
🔒
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