1995 PLP 42 (PLC)
MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE Versus COFCOT TEXTILE (PVT.) LTD., HYDERABAD through Manager
| Citation | 1995 PLP 42 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Agha Ali Haider, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE Versus COFCOT TEXTILE (PVT.) LTD., HYDERABAD through Manager |
| Primary Law | Industrial dispute‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 42 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial dispute‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 42 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Agha Ali Haider, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 42 (PLC) (MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE Versus COFCOT TEXTILE (PVT.) LTD., HYDERABAD through Manager). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Appellant.
- Abdul Ghani Khan for Respondent:
- Date of hearing: 16th October, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Forcible resignation‑‑‑Proof‑‑‑Employee had stated that he had not resigned, but when he reported for duty he was "made to write an application and sign same with thumb impression" which later on turned out to be his resignation‑‑‑Entire letter of resignation was in the handwriting of employee which mentioned that he was requesting employers to be relieved because of his domestic compulsions‑‑‑Employee had also received his dues‑‑‑Employee had never complained to union or any body about his allegedly forced resignation from him‑‑‑Employee had nowhere stated as to why alleged force was applied to him and how he had made himself persona non grata to the employers‑‑‑In absence of any supporting evidence of such wild allegation from any quarter, his resignation was held to be voluntary.
Judgment & Decree
Abdul Ghani Khan for Respondent: Date of hearing: 16th October, 1991. The appellant was working as a Fitter with the respondents from 7‑4‑1990. It is alleged that when he had reported for duty on 13‑1‑1991 he was "made to write an application and sign the same with thumb‑impression". It turned out to be his resignation. He had filed the petition which came to be dismissed resulting in this appeal.
2. Syed Fasahat Hussain Rizvi has not turned up and sent an application. The matter being old, the application has been rejected by me and I have heard Mr. Abdul Ghani Khan, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Admittedly the entire letter of resignation is in the handwriting of the appellant. It mentions that he was requesting to be relieved because of domestic compulsions. He had also received his dues up to 13th of January,1991. Exh. R/8, the `Pay Sheet' is on the record. The respondents have also produced the "Acceptance of the resignation" letter Exh. R/7, which is on a printed form and duly signed by the appellant.
4. The appellant does not say that he had complained to the union or any body about this forcible resignation from him. He knew what he was writing and therefore could not be heard to say that "he was made to sign and thumb mark" the document. Even the letter of acceptance of resignation is in Urdu and his signature reflects a composed mind and a firm hand. The appellant has also not stated as to why this force was applied to him and how he had made himself persona non grata to the respondents. There is no support to these wild allegations from any quarter.
5. In the result I will maintain the impugned order and dismiss it. H.B.T./2357/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.