1995 PLP 604 (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD ASLAM QURESHI Versus SECRETARY, SRTC, HYDERABAD and another
| Citation | 1995 PLP 604 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASLAM QURESHI Versus SECRETARY, SRTC, HYDERABAD and another |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 604 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 604 (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 604 (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD ASLAM QURESHI Versus SECRETARY, SRTC, HYDERABAD and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Nemo for Appellant.
- Miss Rukhsana Ahmed for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 23rd April, 1995.
- Appellant Muhammad Aslam Qureshi and his Advocate Mr. S. Fasahat Hussain Rizvi called absent.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.O. 15(3)(e)‑‑‑Dismissal from service for misconduct‑‑‑Employee was dismissed from service after giving him charge‑sheet and holding domestic enquiry against him for remaining absent from duty for more than 110 day, without any intimation‑‑‑Absence of employee for very long period without getting his leave sanctioned by employer, amounted to misconduct under S.O. 15(3)(e), of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 and such employee was rightly dismissed on that ground.
Judgment & Decree
Nemo for Appellant. Miss Rukhsana Ahmed for Respondents. Date of hearing: 23rd April, 1995. Appellant Muhammad Aslam Qureshi and his Advocate Mr. S. Fasahat Hussain Rizvi called absent. Miss Rukhsana Ahmed for M/s. Talmiz Burney and Company for the respondent SRTC present. The appellant was working as a cleaner with the respondent. He remained absent from duty on and from 16‑8‑1990 to 5‑12‑1990 without any intimation and appeared on 6‑12‑1990 with two Medical Certificates. He was given a charge‑sheet for remaining absent for more than 10 days (actually 11 days). A domestic enquiry was held against him and he was found guilty. He was dismissed from service. After a grievance notice to District Manager, SRTC he filed a grievance petition before the Labour Court, Hyderabad. The learned Labour Court found that the appellant remained absent for very long period without getting his leave sanctioned by the respondent. That his absence amounted to misconduct under section 15 of the Standing Orders Ordinance, He was rightly found a guilty. That his grievance petition therefore merits no consideration,
2. The appellant s not even sent a request for adjournment for any reason and he was absent on the last hearing also which shows that he is no longer interested in this appeal. The appeal is without any substance and is accordingly dismissed. The order of the lower Court is therefore maintained. H.B.T./2457/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.