Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss. 25-A & 38(3)--Dismissal--Employee dismissed for stealing pipes from premises of establishment--Direct evidence not available against employee and nothing existed on record to show that any eye-witness of theft was produced by establishment either before Inquiry Officer or before Labour Court--Employee not caught red handed-Sweepers who were caught red handed stating that they were removing pipes on a direction from employee--Neither a theft case was got registered against sweepers nor they were dismissed from service and only employee was picked up and chosen to be removed from service-Establishment miserably failing to produce direct evidence--Order of Labour Court upholding dismissal of employee from service set aside and ordered to be reinstated in service. S. Fashat Hussain Rizvi for Appellant. Abdul Ghani for Respondent. Date of hearing: 8th December, 1986. DECISION This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the impugned order, dated 11-5-1986, passed by the Sind Labour Court No. VI, Hyderabad, who had dismissed the grievance petition of the appellant, under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969. 2. Brief facts of the case that the appellant was a permanent employee of the respondent Mills since 17-5-1971, and was working as Sanitary Supervisor. On 14-6-1984, he was charge-sheeted for having committed theft of the employers' property, under the provisions of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968. As, his reply to the charge-sheet was not enquiry was conducted against him and in consequence of its findings, the appellant was dismissed from service on 29-8-1984. Thereafter, the appellant submitted his grievance petition before the learned Labour Court. 3. The respondent establishment resisted the petition and questioned the maintainability of the grievance petition on the ground that as the appellant was a Sanitary Inspector belonging to supervisory staff and getting monthly emoluments of more than Rs. 800, therefore, he was not a 'workman' under the Law. On merits, it was the case of the respondent Mills, the charge of the theft of the pipes of the…

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