1989 PLP 98 (PLC)
Rana MUHAMMAD SARWAR Versus PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPLIES
| Citation | 1989 PLP 98 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | Rana MUHAMMAD SARWAR Versus PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPLIES |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 98 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 98 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 98 (PLC) (Rana MUHAMMAD SARWAR Versus PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPLIES). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Malik Mohammad Asghar for Appellant.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XX111 of 1969).
S. 25-A & 38 (3)--Grievance petition--Bank employee (Store Supervisor) responsible for loss of money due to theft, depositing amount involved to save himself from criminal case--Such employee seeking refund of said amount by way of grievance petition--No right for recovery of such amount guaranteed- Grievance petition, held, was rightly returned by Labour Court as it could not order refund of amount.
Judgment & Decree
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XX111 of 1969).
S. 25-A & 38 (3)--Grievance petition--Bank employee (Store Supervisor) responsible for loss of money due to theft, depositing amount involved to save himself from criminal case--Such employee seeking refund of said amount by way of grievance petition--No right for recovery of such amount guaranteed- Grievance petition, held, was rightly returned by Labour Court as it could not order refund of amount. Malik Mohammad Asghar for Appellant. Nemo for Respondents. The appeal captioned above arises from the decision dated 19-3-1987 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 5 Faisalabad whereby the grievance petition has been returned to the appellant for want of jurisdiction. 2. The facts are that an amount of Rs. 43,190.20 was in the custody of the appellant when he was serving as Store Supervisor at Sale Depot, Green Market, Jhang. The amount was to be deposited in the bank but he failed to do so. The amount was stolen away and a case was registered with the police. The petitioner too was arrested by the police, he, therefore, deposited Rs. 23,000 with the respondent. He has brought application under section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance for a declaration that the recovery of Rs. 23,000 was against the law and facts and without lawful authority. The prayer is also for a direction for the refund of the amount. It is evident that the appellant deposited the amount to be saved from the criminal case and not as a fine or compensation. The learned counsel for the appellant has failed to show any law which may have guaranteed to the appellant any right for the recovery of the amount. Since a case has been registered the amount relates to a criminal case -and for this reason also Labour JA Court even if it be said it has jurisdiction cannot order for the refund of the same. The grievance petition, therefore, has been rightly returned to the appellant by the learned lower Court. 3. As a result the appeal fails and is dismissed in limine. A.E./367/Lb. P Appeal dismissed.