1971 PLP 282 (PLC)

MD. NURUL ISLAM KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑This is an applica tion under section 25(1)(6) of the East Pakistan Employ ment of Labour (Standing Orders) Act, 1965 which will be herein after referred to as the Act. The case of the first party is that he was appointed as a Darwan under the second party on 13‑3-1961 and. the last pay drawn by him was Re. 125.00. On 28‑5-1970 when the first party was doing his night duty the second party came to the factory and started abusing him. When the first party objected to this abusing, the second party became very enraged and dismissed him and also threatened him with dire consequences. The first party brought the matter to the Assistant Secretary of their Union. He was not paid wages for the month of May 1970. He submitted his grievance petition on 3‑6‑1970. But the second party gave an unsatisfactory reply. Hence this case for directing the second party to re‑instate the first party to his former post with all back wages and other legal dues: The second party entered into appearance, but did not file any written statement. The Managing 'Partner Mt. Monir appeared and argued the case. He admitted in course of his submissions that there was no enquiry, no charge‑sheet was issued, etc., and that the first party was also not given a personal hearing. He was verbally dismissed. However, he said that the first party was absent without any reason or prior notice. He produced a letter in which the first party was directed to resume his duties and was told that if he did not return to his duties within 7‑7‑1970, his services would be automatically terminated. Some other communications in this connection were also produced. In reply to the grievance question of the first party it appears that the second party directed the first party to produce the medical certificate of fitness of his ear and eye‑sight. So it appears that he has taken a different ground now. In the facts and circumstances as it is admitted by the second party that the services of the first party were terminated, he is entitled to get termination benefits according to the own admission of the second party. Accordingly it is ordered that the case be allowed on contest and the second party be directed to deposit the following favour of the first party in Court within termination benefits in thirty days from the date of passing this order :‑ (i) Arrear pay of May 1970 at the rate of Rs. 125.00 per month. (ii) Notice pay for 90 days at the rate of Rs. 125'00 per mouth. (iii) Compensation at the rate of 14 days' wages for every completed year of service or for any part thereof in excess of six months, that is, for 9 years equivalent to 126 days' wages. (iv) Unavailed of annual leave salary, if any, and other legal dues, if any, to be calculated by the second party. Member Mr. S. A. Haleem agreed with my decision above.