Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLG 407 1991 SLD 407 1991 PLC 350
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. SUK-430 of 1988, decision dated: 5-10-1989.
AHMED ALI U. QURESHI 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

GHULAM HUSSAIN

VS

FINANCIAL ADVISER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER and 2 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Workmen's Compensation Act (VIII of 1923)--- ----S.2(n)(i)---"Workman"---Definition of workman in sub-clause (i) of S.2(n) has nothing to do with capacity or duties or functions of Railway employee but concerns only the posting because function even in administrative office, district office or subdivision office of Railway has been taken care of---Appellant working as Sectional Paymaster, going from station to station, to disburse pay of Railway employees although his permanent posting was in office of Divisional Railway Master which was an administrative office---Fact that appellant was posted in administrative office, held would exclude him from definition of a "workman". Civil Appeal No. 578 of 1980 rel. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)--- ----S.25-A---Workmen's Compensation Act (VIII of 1923), S.2(n)---Compulsory retirement---Appellant compulsorily retired from service for misappropriation approached Labour Court---Appellant Sectional Paymaster in Railways disbursing pay to employees from station to station but his permanent posting was in office of Divisional Paymaster which was an Administrative Office--­Appellant as such was not a "workman" but a civil servant---Remedy of appellant lay by, way of appeal to Service Tribunal and not to Labour Court. M.L. Shahani for Appellant. Shabbir Ahmed Awan for Respondents. Date of hearing: 5th October, 1989. DECISION This is an appeal against the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No. VII, Sukkur dated 1-12-1988, whereby grievance 'petition of the appellant was dismissed. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant was admittedly appointed as Upper Division Clerk in Pakistan Railways at the relevant time and had been working as Sectional Pay Master. On 7-3-1983 he was served with a charge-sheet alleging therein that he had committed misappropriation of an amount of Rs.2,25,869.25 of Railway Cash in connivance with Messrs Abdul Ghafoor and Muhammad Hanif Khan. After domestic enquiry, which was jointly held against the appellant and others, he was compulsorily retired from service vide order, dated 10-10-1985. He preferred Departmental Appeal on…
🔒
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