| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 1489 1989 SLD 1489 1989 PLC 680 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No.LHR-528 of 1988, decided on 10th December, 1988.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
H.R.Haider for Appellant. Mian Abdul Rashid for
Respondents.
Appeal No.LHR-528 of 1988, decided on 10th December, 1988.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
H.R.Haider for Appellant. Mian Abdul Rashid for
Respondents.
SIDDIQ AKBAR
VS
PRESIDENT, HABIB BANK Ltd., KARACHI and 2 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Industrial dispute-- --- Dismissal for misconduct--Domestic enquiry--Admission of allegations--- submission of reply to charge-sheet denying allegations does not amount admission so as to dispense with requirement of inquiry-Domestic quasi-criminal in nature and it is necessary to hold inquiry where charges have not been denied even if no reply to charge-sheet is given, it amounts to denial of allegations. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)------ ---Ss.25-A & 38(3)--Grievance petition of Bank employee against dismissal for misconduct--Charge-sheet served but no reply submitted by accused--Dismissal order passed without inquiry--Such order, held, was not sustainable--Employer praying for permission for holding inquiry--Allegation not involving embezzlement or misappropriation--No unavoidable circumstances shown which prevented employer to hold inquiry before passing impugned order----Labour Appellate Tribunal while accepting grievance petition refused permission for inquiry. (c) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)----- ---S. 25-A--Reinstatement--Back benefits--Dismissal order passed without inquiry--Petitioner deposing that he remained jobless after dismissal---- Back benefits however disallowed in order to promote good relations between parties. JUDGMENT The appeal captioned above emerges from the decision dated 10-10-1988 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.1, Lahore, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his reinstatement in service has been dismissed. 2. The allegation against the appellant was that he had produced a bogus certificate of matriculation in order to get promotion as cashier and succeeded in doing so. Admittedly no inquiry was held. 3. Learned lower Court has held that since the appellant did not give reply to the charge-sheet and did not deny the allegation of producing false matriculation certificate, holding of inquiry was not necessary. On the face of it the ground given by the learned lower Court is insufficient. Only in cases where the allegations have been admitted there is no need to hold inquiry but in the present case the appellant did not make anyβ¦
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