Case Details

Citation(s)
1984 SLG 1636 1984 SLD 1636 1984 PLC 1059
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. LHR-169 of 1981/Pb., decided on 31st October, 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

ABDUR RASHID

VS

SUNSHINE COTTON MILLS LTD. AND ANOTHER

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)- -- Ss. 25-A & 38 (3)--Grievance petition against termination of service simplicitor--Resisted on grounds that (1) post abolished and (2) petitioner had received benefits towards total and final settlement of dues-Petitioner failing to prove his contention that fresh appointment made against post vacated by him and non-receipt of his total dues-Petition, in circumstances, held, rightly dismissed by Labour Court. Mian Mahmood Hussain for Appellant. Abdul Rashid Randhawa for Respondents. Date of hearing: 25th October, 1982. JUDGMEMT This appeal is directed against the decision, dated 17th June, 1981 Passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No.3, Ferozewala at Lahore whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his reinstate­ment was dismissed. The facts are that the appellant was Costing clerk in the respondent Mills Office. His services were terminated on 3rd August, 1980 for the reason that they were no more required. The order of termination is P. A. The appellant challenged the said order in his grievance petition. The pleas on which the order of termination was challenged were that no ground for termination was given in the order of the termination, and post of the appellant was not abolished as an other man was appointed against it. On behalf of the respondents it was contended that no one was appoin­ted on the post left by the appellant, that grievance notice had not been served, that the appellant had received benefits towards total and' final settlement of his dues, therefore, he was debarred from coming to the Court. The appellant stated before the learned lower Court that one Habib­ullah Costing clerk already in service was posted in his place against the post of Costing clerk vacated by him. One Muhammad Sharif Produc­tion Clerk was promoted in place of Muhammad Sharif and another man was appointed as Production Clerk. Mr. Mazhar Imam Kazi R. W. 1. deposed that no new man was employed in place of the appellant. No question was put to this witness in cross-examination about the posting of Habibullah in place of the appellant, about the promotion of Muhammad Sharif as Costing Clerk…
🔒
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