| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1990 SLG 1392 1990 SLD 1392 1990 PLC 429 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-277 of 1988, decided on 7th December, 1988.
AHMED ALI U QURESHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appeal No. KAR-277 of 1988, decided on 7th December, 1988.
AHMED ALI U QURESHI, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF
VS
Messrs SWISSAIR TRANSPORT COMPANY LTD., KARACHI MUHAMMAD ASHRAF vs Messrs SWISSAIR TRANSPORT COMPANY LTD., KARACHI
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-- ---Ss. 25-A(5), 36 & 38(3)---Grievance petition---Adjudication of ---Evidence--Written statement cannot be considered as evidence to rebut evidence on oath--Services of employee terminated purportedly due to retrenchment---Termination challenged on grounds of victimisation and mala fides---Employee stating in affidavit-in-evidence that there was no decrease in work justifying retrenchment and that termination was result of annoyance of management due to his trade union activities---Employer neither filing any affidavit nor producing any other evidence in rebuttal---Plea that averments in written statement were sufficient to rebut claim of employee---Validity---Person signing written statement having not been examined in Court, written statement, held, could not be considered as evidence to rebut affidavit-in-evidence of employee---Volume of work whether decreased justifying retrenchment and termination order whether a colourable exercise of powers, such questions being that of fact; Labour Court as well as Appellate Tribunal have to go in all questions of fact ---Averments of employee remaining unrebutted by employer due to non production of evidence---Held, in spite of fact that decrease of volume of work was not proved employee was removed from service on same day on which he was acting as co-worker for another worker against whom enquiry was held on same day---Termination order, was mala fide hence set aside awarding reinstatement with back benefits. 1985 P L C 735; 1986 P L C 352 and Mst. Khairun Nisa and 6 others v. Malik Muhammad Ishaq and 2 others P L D 1972 S C 25 rel. Khalilur Rehman, Representative for Appellant. M.A Khan for Respondents. Date of hearing: 1st December, 1988. DECISION This appeal is directed against the order of learned Presiding Officer, Sind Labour Court No. V at Karachi, dated 29-8-1988, whereby he dismissed the grievance petition under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969 filed by the appellant. 2. The case of the appellant, in brief, is that he was working as a sweeper with the respondents when .his services were terminated on 31-8-1.987 on the ground of retrenchment. It is alleged by…
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