| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 1307 1989 SLD 1307 1989 PLC 414 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. LHR-378 of 1988/Pb., decided on 18th July, 1988.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Hamid Mukhtar for Appellant. Asmat Kamal for
Respondent.
Appeal No. LHR-378 of 1988/Pb., decided on 18th July, 1988.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Hamid Mukhtar for Appellant. Asmat Kamal for
Respondent.
DISTRICT MANAGER, PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, LAHORE
VS
MUHAMMAD ASLAM
Law:
Section:
(a) Industrial Relations ordinance (XXII of 1969)- --S. 25-A--'Termination of service--Employee employed as Badli Conductor worked for three years and the vacancy, he was working against, was permanent-On completion of probationary period employee was to be made permanent-Employer failed to prove that any post of Conductor was abolished and that respondent was junior most and his termination was ordered on this account-Order of reinstatement of worker maintained. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- -----S. 25-A--Back benefits--Worker stated on oath that he remained jobless during period he was out of service--Worker was neither cross-examined on this point nor any evidence produced in rebuttal--Back benefits allowed to worker in circumstance. JUDGMENT The appeal captioned above arises from the decision dated 3-5-1988 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore, whereby the respondent has been directed to be reinstated in service with back benefits. 2. The facts are that the respondent was employed as badli conductor in 1983. His services were terminated on 28-4-1986 when he had asked for being made permanent. The respondent brought grievance petition for his reinstatement on the ground that his services were terminated orally. The plea taken by the appellant was that the respondent had become surplus but no documentary evidence was produced. Even if it be said for the sake of arguments that the respondent had become surplus, his services could be terminated by observing the rule of first come last go but the appellant failed to prove this fact also. Since the respondent served for three years, this is not believable that he was employed only as a badli conductor. Rule is that a badli is appointed when a permanent employee goes on leave or is not available temporarily for some other reason. This cannot be believed that a permanent conductor went on three years leave. In order to prevent the employees from becoming permanent, they are usually shown to have been employed as badli conductors, whereas actually the vacancy is permanent. The respondent, therefore, on 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