| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 1664 1989 SLD 1664 1989 PLC 987 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. 2 of 1987, heard on 28th November, 1988.
AHMED ALI U. QURESHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Gul Muhammad S. Soomro, Representative for Appellant.
Appeal No. 2 of 1987, heard on 28th November, 1988.
AHMED ALI U. QURESHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Gul Muhammad S. Soomro, Representative for Appellant.
KARACHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION
VS
S. SIDDIQUR RIZA RIZVI
Law:
Section:
(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- --S. 25-A-Grievance petition--Limitation--Grievance notice served in time--No reply to notice--Grievance petition filed within 2 months from expiry of 15 days period after grievance, notice coming to notice of employer, held, was within limitation period. (b) West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) (VI of 1968)-- ---S.Os. 8(2) & 15(3)(e)--Misconduct--unauthorised leave--Workman sending application for leave from home and not desiring communication of order thereon to him--Workman, in circumstances, held, duty bound to find out whether leave was granted--Repeated applications for extension of leave sent from home without indicating reasons--Leave was not granted and instead notice was sent on given address through registered post for resumption of duty-Workman failing to resume duty even 5 days after issuance of notice and resuming duty thereafter-Workman, in circumstances, held, remained absent unauthorizedly and since period of absence exceeded 10 days he was rightly charged for misconduct--Absence remaining explained even in domestic enquiry--Punishment of reversion to lower post, was justified in circumstances. 1960 P L C: 439 ref. . DECISION This appeal is directed against the order, dated 30-11-1986, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Sind Labour Court No. 1 at Karachi, whereby he allowed the grievance petition filed by the respondent and ordered that the respondent stood restored to his original post as if no dismissal/reversion order' was passed and his back benefits should be paid to him within thirty days. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondent was working as an assistant with the appellants at the relevant time. On 30--5-1952. he was charge-sheeted on 3 counts. First, he was alleged to have remained absent for 32 days. In the second charge it was alleged that he had remained absent from 19-5-1982 to 26-5-1982 and the third charge related to his absence of 24 days from 17-4-1982 to 10-5-1982. A domestic enquiry was held. The Enquiry Officer found the respondent not guilty of the first two charges, but found him guilty of the third charge of…
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