Case Details

Citation(s)
1986 SLG 2242 1986 SLD 2242 1986 PLC 697
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. LHR-580 of 1985, decided on 3rd February, 1986.
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

PUNJAB SEED CORPORATION, LAHORE and another

VS

MUHAMMAD SADIQ

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)-- ---S.O. 12 (3)--Termination of service--Post existing--Services no longer required, in circumstances, not a reason for termination and termination order with such a reason illegal. Yawar Ali Khan for Appellants. Malik Muhammad Asghar for Respondent. Date of hearing: 21st January, 1986. JUDGMENT The decision, dated 15-10-1985 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.3, Lahore at Ferozewala has been challenged, whereby the respondent was directed to be re-instated in service with back benefits. 2, The respondent was initially employed as Store Officer on 11-5-1581 vide Exh.P.1 but was later on redesignated as Store-keeper and confirmed as such on 20-10-1982 vide Exh.P.2. His services were terminated, vide order Exh.P.3, dated 24-1-1983. The reason given is "services no longer required". Only two points are involved in this appeal--one is if the respondent has been wrongly adjudged as a workman and the other is whether his services were rightly terminated. 3. So far as the question of workman is concerned, the respondent deposed that he used to maintain paddy register, cotton seed register, seed store register, weekly despatch register and wheat register. He also deposed that wheat issued, sale vouchers and determine vouchers were prepared by him. As a specimen he produced extracts Exh.P.4 of the registers maintained by him and said that all the entries of the registers were in his handwriting. R.W.1 said that the central record was with the respondent and he himself used to make entries in it. The evidence of this witness is that the respondent was incharge of all the stores and used to look after them. He did not say that the respondent used to supervise the working of the persons employed in the stores, but as mentioned above…
🔒
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