| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1993 SLG 1231 1993 SLD 1231 1993 PLC 252 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-462 of 1991, decided on 1st October, 1992.
AGHA ALI HYDER, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. KAR-462 of 1991, decided on 1st October, 1992.
AGHA ALI HYDER, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Messrs SOGIA (PAKISTAN BRANCH), KARACHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, NEW JINNAH TERMINAL, KARACHI AIRPORT, KARACHI through Personnel Manager
VS
ASGHAR ALI
Law:
Section:
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) ----S.O. 5---Dismissal from service on ground of misconduct---Show-cause notice, no doubt, was issued by employer to employee indicating that employee had been instrumental in creating ferment among workers which had resulted in rowdyism and had constituted misconduct, but dismissal order admittedly was passed against employee without waiting for his reply and without holding any enquiry against him---Dismissal order against empl9yee having been passed by employer in flagrant violation of provisions of S.0.15(4) of Ordinance, 1968, same could not sustain. Mashooq Ali v. Pioneer Steel Works Limited 1984 PLC 43 ref, M. Latif Saghar for Appellant. Abdul Majeed, Representative for Respondent. Date of hearing: 1st October, 1992. DECISION The circumstances forming the background of this case briefly stated, are as follows:-- The respondent was working as a Foreman Carpenter Grade-1 on the site of the New Jinnah Terminal, since 25-7-1989. On 8-10-1990 he was served with a notice to show cause as to why he should not be dismissed as he was responsible for holliganism and was also found instigating co-workers for going on strike. The reply was to be given within 3 days. 2. It was sent on the 20th of October but he came to be dismissed on the 14th, without holding any enquiry at all. 3. The respondent had served the requisite grievance notice which was replied to and thereafter the petition was filed before the Labour Court. 3-A. The contention of the petitioner was that he had been dismissed because he had incurred the wrath of the employer for evincing interest in trade union activities. Admittedly there was ferment among the workers and there was a report also lodged with the Police about certain incidents, which is not material for the purpose of this case. In the written reply it was stated that the petitioner was not a workman but a supervisor, but the allegation in regard to the dismissal without holding any enquiry was not denied. 4. The petitioner…
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