1992 PLP 750 (PLC(CS))
RAJA Versus Messrs RAJBI INDUSTRIES, KARACHI
| Citation | 1992 PLP 750 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | RAJA Versus Messrs RAJBI INDUSTRIES, KARACHI |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP 750 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP 750 (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 750 (PLC(CS)) (RAJA Versus Messrs RAJBI INDUSTRIES, KARACHI). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Gohar Iqbal, Representative for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 10th January, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
S.O.15
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1968), S.25-A Dismissal from service--Appellant claimed to have been orally dismissed from service but respondent contending that appellant was charge-sheeted for remaining absent and that he had been avoiding to face inquiry--Appellant failed to prove that he was orally removed from service--Held, appellant continued to be in service and that he was entitled to all the benefits admissible to him--Appellant was however, directed to face inquiry and question of payment of dues was subjected to result of inquiry.
Judgment & Decree
S.O.15
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1968), S.25-A Dismissal from service--Appellant claimed to have been orally dismissed from service but respondent contending that appellant was charge-sheeted for remaining absent and that he had been avoiding to face inquiry--Appellant failed to prove that he was orally removed from service--Held, appellant continued to be in service and that he was entitled to all the benefits admissible to him--Appellant was however, directed to face inquiry and question of payment of dues was subjected to result of inquiry. Gohar Iqbal, Representative for Appellant. Date of hearing: 10th January, 1991. This is an appeal against the order of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No. 1 at Karachi, dated 8-11-1990, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant was dismissed.
2. I have heard Mr. Gohar Iqbal, learned counsel for the appellant and have also gone through the record and proceedings of the case.
3. The appellant claims to have been orally dismissed from service, for which, after serving grievance notice upon the respondents, the appellant filed grievance petition. The respondents contended that he was not dismissed, but continued to be in service. They however contended that they have charge-sheeted the appellant for remaining absent, but the appellant has 'been avoiding to face the enquiry. The learned Labour Court came to the conclusion that the appellant failed to prove that he was orally removed from service. The appellant therefore continues to be in service of the respondents and as such would be entitled to all the benefits admissible to him. He is however directed to present himself before the respondents for resumption of duty and to face the enquiry. The question of payment of dues or back benefits if any would depend upon the result of the enquiry.
4. With this observation, the appeal is dismissed in limine. M.Y.H./1828/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.