Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969).---- ---S. 25-A-Termination of service---Re-instatement--Back benefits-Set off-Employer challenging award of back benefits to employee on latter's reinstatement on ground that employee was gainfully employed `elsewhere during period he remained out of job and that his reinstatement was ordered for technical reasons-No finding available that employee was gain­fully employed elsewhere and finding of Inquiry Officer silent on such question-Order of Tribunal showing that reinstatement was not for technical reasons but on ground that charges of misconduct not proved for reasons of vagueness of charges and order of termination found illegal---No justification, held, existed for withholding back benefits to employee in circumstances, (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---S. 25-A - Reinstatement - Meaning-Reinstatement means reinstatement with full back benefits unless same withheld for specific reasons - Plea that back benefits should not be allowed coming in nature of a set off, justification, held, has to be provided by opposite party before back benefits can be with held, ­In absence of said justification, back benefits could not be withheld. H. R. Haider for Petitioner. Shaukat Ali Mehr for Respondent No. 1. Date of hearing 25th March, 1985. JUDGMENT M. ZAFARULLAH, J.-Aftab Ahmad respondent No. 1 was working as a line jobber when his services were terminated for misconduct on 24th August, 1982. He challenged the termination in the Labour Court but his petition was dismissed on 20th December, 1982. The Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal in appeal, however, has ordered the re-instatement of respondent No. 1 with full back benefits vide its order dated 23rd May, 1984. The employers have challenged the orders of the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal in a constitutional petition. This petition was admitted to consider the question of back benefits only as the petitioners press for their petition only to that extent. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners is of the view that the respondent No. 1 was not entitled to back…

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