1989 PLP 16 (PLC)

Iftikhar Ahmad v. President, National Bank of Pakistan P L D 1988 S C 53 ref. M. Asghar Malik for Petitioner. Ch. Nazir Ahmad for the Bank. Date of hearing: 19th June, 1988. Facts giving rise to this constitutional petition, briefly stated, are that by order dated 6‑1‑1983, petitioner, a messenger in the Muslim Commercial Bank Limited was dismissed from service on account of misconduct. He challenged his dismissal in a grievance petition filed under section 25‑A of Industrial Relations Ordinance which was accepted by the Punjab Labour Court No..9 Multan vide order dated 30‑5‑1984 whereby petitioner was ordered to be reinstated without back benefits. Feeling aggrieved with this order, the employer, respondent No. 3 herein preferred an appeal before the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal. Petitioner also filed cross‑objections against the refusal of back benefits.

2. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal following the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court reported in 1985 P L C 1053 held that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the grievance petition filed by a dismissed bank employee and, therefore, by order dated 10‑3‑1986, the learned Tribunal accepted the appeal of the employer and setting aside the order of Labour Court directed that the grievance petition filed by the petitioner be returned to him for presentation to the proper forum and consequently the cross?-objections filed by the petitioner regarding back benefits were also dismissed.

3. The aforementioned order of the learned Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal as brought under challenge in the present constitutional petition.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for parties. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the judgment of the Division Bench following which the learned Labour Appellate Tribunal had set aside the Labour Court's order and gave the impugned direction has since been set aside by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Iftikhar Ahmad v President. National Bank of Pakistan" reported in P L D 1988 S C

53. It has been held by the Supreme Court that a dismissed employee of a Bank has a right to approach the Labour Court to seek redress of his grievance relating to his terms of service. It is observed by the Supreme Court "We are unable to agree with the view taken by p the High Courts of Sind and the Punjab that the petitions filed by the appellants before the Labour Courts under section 25‑A(4) of the Ordinance were not competent solely for the reason that their terms and conditions of service were regulated by the award of the Wage Commission.? In view of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court, referred to hereinabove, the impugned order of the Appellate Tribunal cannot be sustained and shall have to be set aside. However, since the Appellate Tribunal accepted the appeal of the respondent/employer and dismissed the petitioner's cross-?objections on the question of jurisdiction alone, the matter shall hay; to be remanded to the Tribunal for decision on merits. Writ petition is accordingly allowed, impugned order of the learned Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect and it is directed that the appeal of the respondent‑bank as also that cross objections of the petitioner shall be treated as pending and shall be disposed of on merits in accordance with law. There will be no order as to costs. S,0./A‑426/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Case remanded.