| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 1659 1989 SLD 1659 1989 PLC 937 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Petition No. 4-t() of 1987, decided on 19th January, 1989.
SALEEM AFTAB SHAIKH, PRESIDING OFFICER
M.G. Saeed Ullah Mumtaz for Petitioner. Sayyed Rashad Abbas Kazmi for
Respondent No. 1. Zaheer Ahmed Qadri for
Respondent No. 2.
Petition No. 4-t() of 1987, decided on 19th January, 1989.
SALEEM AFTAB SHAIKH, PRESIDING OFFICER
M.G. Saeed Ullah Mumtaz for Petitioner. Sayyed Rashad Abbas Kazmi for
Respondent No. 1. Zaheer Ahmed Qadri for
Respondent No. 2.
TAHIR AHMAD KHAN
VS
PAKISTAN TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE DEPARTMENT and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---S. 25-A--Grievance petition--Limitation--Departmental appeal remaining unreplied--Grievance notice served thereafter, rejected--Petition contested on grounds of limitation--Period spent in departmental appeal, held, was excludable. 1980 P L C 106; 1980 P L C 510 and1980 P L C 42 rel. (b) West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (`VI of 1968)- ---S. 1(4) & S.O. 1(b)--Permanent workman--Employee (Lineman) of Telegraph and Telephone Department functioning under Federal Government--No rules of service were applicable to Lineman--Such employee was governed by provisions of Ordinance--Service rendered admittedly continuous for about 4 years--Plea that appointment was against leave vacancy but by mistake retained in service even though vacancy was to last only for some time--Employer, held, could not have benefit of his own mistake and employee, attained status of a permanent workman. JUDGMENT This is an application under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969 for reinstatement of the petitioner. The applicant was appointed as a lineman on 72-3-1983 at the rate of Rs.617 per month. He qualified a written test for the post of a regular Lineman. The petitioner served the department for about four years and was then removed from service. In his place one Muhammad Sheraz was appointed who was not made a respondent at the beginning but later on he appeared and became a respondent because he thought he was likely to be affected by any order passed by this Court and therefore it was necessary to hear him. The written statements have been filed in the case, one by the department and other by Sheraz respondent. The petition has been contested. Some preliminary objection were raised. 2. Both sides led evidence. P.W. 1 is Tahir Ahmed. He stated that the appointment letter is Exh. P.1 and that he was posted in Westridge. He was made regular vide Exh. P.2 arid his services were terminated in May. 1987. He has further stated that he has been working continuously with the respondent since 12-3-1983. When he was removed from service he filed a departmental appeal which Exh. P.3. This was not decided…
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