1996 PLP 136 (PLC)

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.O. 15(3)(a)(b)‑‑‑Dismissal from service‑‑‑Employee was dismissed from service after charge‑sheet and enquiry conducted against him on charge of misconduct‑‑‑Enquiry Officer found employee guilty of, misconduct for acts of subversion of discipline as well as insubordination‑‑‑Clear evidence of insubordination and blackmailing by employee against his boss disrupting entire discipline of Factory Management was available on record‑‑‑Employee, in circumstances, was rightly dismissed from service. Khalilur Rehman, Representative for Appellant. Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1995. This appeal is directed against the decision of Fifth Sindh Labour Court, Karachi, whereby the grievance petition of one Abrar Nawab Ahmed the appellant was dismissed for re‑instatement and back benefits.

2. The facts in brief are that the appellant was working as a Senior Clerk I Computer Operator with the respondent Pharmaceutical Company. It was found that the appellant often disappeared from his seat, taking away the key of the drawer containing the papers which were often required urgently by the Manager. He also took away with himself the list of articles to be purchased for the purchase Manager. He took more than one hour time during the lunch interval and he often misbehaved showing lack of discipline and was also guilty of insubordination. He was, therefore, charge‑sheeted and Enquiry Officer was appointed for a domestic enquiry. In reply to the charge‑sheet the appellant made counter‑allegations against the Head of Office in order to blackmail him. He often alleged that his Boss wanted to keep a girl in his place, and he used to pay him money from his pocket off and on as illegal gratification to shut his mouth. Thus, he was a person who tried even to blackmail the Manager and because of his misconduct the entire discipline of the Factory staff was affected. The Enquiry Officer, therefore, found him guilty of misconduct for acts subversive of discipline as well as insubordination within the meaning of Standing Order 15(3)(h)(a).

3. The appellant has merely called in question the procedure adopted at the enquiry. On the other hand there is clear evidence of insubordination mud slinging and blackmailing by the appellant against his Boss, disrupting the entire discipline of the Factory Management. It could never have been intended that such persons should be retained in any Factory against the wishes of the Boss, if that were so it would be impossible to maintain the proper discipline and administration in the management office. Such person cannot be trusted on the management against the wishes of the Boss. I can, therefore, see no reason to interfere with the order of the learned Labour Court. The order of the Labour Court is accordingly maintained and the appeal is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./2547/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.