Law:

Section:

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----S.25-A---Dismissal from service---Person on whose report action was taken against employee had not been examined before Labour Court; he had even, not made any statement before enquiry officer---Other witnesses who were present at relevant time and whose evidence would have been relevant were not examined---Evidence on record was not sufficient to take action against employee---Delay in depositing amount which was a major charge against employee, was nominal whereas person reporting against employee had admitted that there could be difference in time as between his watch and machine watch---Labour Court's finding in ordering reinstatement of employee being correct, same was maintained. Rafat Usmani for Appellant. Abdul Majeed, Representative for Respondents. Date of hearing: 4th February, 1992. DECISION The circumstances culminating in this appeal are as follows: The respondent was appointed as a waiter on 7-10-1982 and was promoted as a Captain from 1-4-1985. On the night of 9th July, 1988 while or duty at the Fanoos, one of the lounges of the Hotel, Zamir Ahmed Naqvi while on a round, had found the movement of the respondent somewhat suspicious. He waited and found some customers, who were members of Swissair Crew, demanding the return of the balance of the payments made to the respondent. He further heard that the cheque also had not been given to the guests on Table No. 2. The matter was reported to the authorities and the show-­cause notice was issued on 13-7-1988 which was replied to by the respondent. There was an enquiry held and on the basis of the report the respondent came to be dismissed on 8-10-1988. 2. The respondent had sent a grievance notice which was replied to and finding no satisfaction had filed the grievance application before the Labour Court. 3. The appellant in their Written Reply maintained that there was a fair enquiry conducted against the respondent in which he was given full opportunity to defend himself, and the dismissal order was based on the charge of fraud and dishonesty which was duly substantiated against him. 4. The respondent was his only witness. Moosa Khan and Hameed…

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