Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 1287 2002 SLD 1287 2002 SCMR 943
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.735 of 2001, decision dated: 9-01-2002.(On appeal from the judgment/order dated 21-11-2000 passed by Peshawar High Court, Circuit Bench, Abbottabad in Writ Petition No. 130 of 2000)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, HAMID ALI MIRZA AND TANVIR AHMED KHAN, JJ
Petitioner in person. Qazi Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents

KHUSHAL KHAN

VS

MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)---S.25-A---Muslim Commercial Bank Limited (Staff) Service Rules, 1981, Item No. 12(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Non-service of grievance notice before filing of grievance petition---Effect---Termination of service---Petitioner being in employment of Muslim Commercial Bank Limited filed appeal before next higher Authority against his dismissal order, but the same was dismissed---Labour Court dismissed his grievance petition---Labour Appellate Tribunal dismissed his appeal on the ground that he had not served grievance notice on his employer, and that his departmental appeal could not be treated and equated as grievance notice, which was a statutory requirement to be fulfilled by the worker under S.25-A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969---Constitutional petition filed by petitioner was also dismissed by High Court---Validity---Petitioner had not served grievance notice upon his employer against his dismissal order--­Appellate Authority was always considered to be distinct and different entity from the original Authority competent to make appointment---Petitioner was appointed by Regional Manager being Competent Authority, whereas he had addressed appeal to the President of the Bank, who was not his Appointing Authority---Petitioner being a Cashier was a Category official, thus, according to Muslim Commercial Bank Limited (Staff) Service Rules, 1981, President of the .Bank could not be his appointing Authority, but Regional Manager would be the employer of petitioner for purposes of S.25-A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969---Appeal filed by petitioner before President of the Bank could not be treated as grievance notice within the meaning of .S. 25-A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969---Petitioner had initiated incompetent proceedings against the respondent as no grievance notice under S.25-A had been issued, us such High Court had rightly declined him the relief---Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal and dismissed the petition in circumstances. 1984 PLC 89 and.C.P.S.L.A. No. 138yP of 1985 ref. (b) Civil service-- Appointing Authority" and "Appellate Authority"…
🔒
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