| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1987 SLG 1050 1987 SLD 1050 1987 PLC 194 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. SUK-260 of 1984 decided on 6th May, 1986.
ALI NAWAZ BUDHANI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. SUK-260 of 1984 decided on 6th May, 1986.
ALI NAWAZ BUDHANI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
ABDUL RAUF
VS
THE DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, SUKKUR and 2 others
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss. 25-A & 38(3)--Grievance petition against termination of services-Workman while admitting that he was not a permanent employee alleging that his services were terminated through verbal orders-No letter of termination shown to have been served on workman by Management-Labour Court directing that a copy of letter of termination be supplied to applicant and dues payable to him upto date of termination should be paid forthwith--Management failing to submit anything in rebuttal of Labour Court's observations/findings--Order of Labour Court maintained and appeal dismissed. DECISION Abdul Rauf submitted an appeal against the impugned order, 8-10-1984, passed by the VIIth Sind Labour Court, Sukkur, who allowed the grievance petition of the appellant, filed under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was appointed by the respondent Railways on 2-12-1979, as Tool Checker but, was declared surplus and was absorbed as Store Issuer under Head Train Examiner, Pakistan Railways Rohri against existing vacancy. He worked as Store Issuer upto 23-6-1983, but, in May, 1983 the respondent stopped his regular salary. Ultimately, on 23-6-1983, the respondents terminated the services of the appellant through verbal order. The appellant claimed that he is also son of a retired Railway employee therefore, he is entitled to employment in the Railway Department against 50$ reserved quota. 3. The case of the respondent Railway is that the appellant was engaged as substitute Tool Checker on 3-12-1979 on purely temporary basis and was subsequently absorbed as Store Issuer on temporary basis as the post of Tool Checker was surrendered. Further, the appellant has alleged that the appellant was appointed all the time for three months and after termination every time he was appointed afresh and was treated as substitute and that the services of the appellant were rightly terminated by the competent authority vide Notice No. 839-E/5/Bills, dated 23-6-1983 and that it is incorrect to say that his services -were terminated through orders. It is further contended that due to…
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