Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 2369 1989 SLD 2369 1989 PLC 714
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. RI-404 of 1988, decided on 31st August, 1988.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN LODHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

PAKISTAN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MOTELS (N), RAWALPINDI

VS

MUHAMMAD ASGHAR KHAN

Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---S. 25-A--Grievance notice--Rules of establishment providing remedy of appeal--Limitation for grievance notice would start from date of receipt of information regarding rejection of appeal and not from date of impugned order. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss. 25-A & 38(3)--Grievance petition against dismissal for misconduct-­Findings of enquiry that alleged charge was established not supported by evidence produced before Enquiry Officer--Order of Labour Court setting aside dismissal order and reinstatement of workman maintained in appeal. (c) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss. 25-A & 38(3)--Reinstatement--Back benefits--Impugned dismissal found not sustainable on merits--Labour Court awarding reinstatement with back benefits--Workman admittedly running taxi owned by him for six months during intervening period--Appellate Tribunal taking view that workman earned more by running taxi only for six months than what he would have earned if he had not been removed from service--Back benefits refused. Muhammad Hanif Bhatti for Appellant. Nasir Saeed Sheikh for Respondent. Date of hearing: 29th August, 1988. JUDGMENT The appeal captioned above emerges from the decision dated 4-5-1988 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 6, Rawalpindi, whereby accepting the grievance petition of the respondent he has been directed to be reinstated in service with back benefits. 2. There were two allegations made against the respondent in the charge ­sheet, copy of which is Exh.P-2. Charge No. 1 was that in November, 1979 Zulqarnain was employed at Gilgit and was absent from 21-10-1979 to the date of the charge-sheet but the respondent drew his pay. The second charge was that although Mr. Zu1qarnain was employed at Gilgit, yet the respondent marked him present at Rawalpindi from 17-11-1979 to 14-1-1980. After the service of the charge-sheet, getting reply to the charge-sheet and holding an inquiry, the respondent was dismissed from service vide order dated 12-11-1980, copy of which is Exh.P-4. The respondent served the grievance notice on 26-9-1983…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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