1995 PLP 149 (PLC)
MAKHZAN Versus WESTERN PAKISTAN TANNERIES, HYDERABAD through Occupier/Director
| Citation | 1995 PLP 149 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Mushtaq Ali Qazi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MAKHZAN Versus WESTERN PAKISTAN TANNERIES, HYDERABAD through Occupier/Director |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 149 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 149 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Mushtaq Ali Qazi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 149 (PLC) (MAKHZAN Versus WESTERN PAKISTAN TANNERIES, HYDERABAD through Occupier/Director). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Rana Mehmood Ali Khan for Appellant.
- NA. Talpur for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1994.
- 4. It is, on the other hand, pointed out by the learned Advocate for We respondents, Mr. NA. Talpur, that this is a case of wilful insubordination and mud‑slinging to blackmail his Manager, which cannot be lightly dealt with as it affects the entire discipline of the factory Management. I entirely agree with the learned counsel for the respondents that unless there is order in all such business Institutions in this country and blackmailers are severely punished, it will not be possible to carry on the administration smoothly.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.O. 15(3)(h)‑‑‑Dismissal from service on ground of misconduct‑‑ Employee was dismissed from service after holding enquiry against him on charge that he had levelled a false serious allegation of dishonesty against Manager of the Company‑‑‑Case was of wilful insubordination and mud slinging to blackmail Manager of Company which could not be lightly dealt with as it would affect entire discipline of Factory Management‑‑‑Employee was rightly dismissed on ground of misconduct, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Rana Mehmood Ali Khan for Appellant. NA. Talpur for Respondent. Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1994. This appeal arises from an order of Labour Court No. VI, Hyderabad, on an application filed by the appellant against his dismissal. The Labour Court found no substance in the application as the dismissal was considered justified. He, therefore, dismissed the application. The appellant Makhzan has, therefore, filed this appeal.
2. The facts, in brief, are that the appellant was working as Chowkidar at Western Pakistan Tanneries, S.I.T.E., Hyderabad. He was posted at the main gate of the factory to check the incoming and outgoing persons. He was to remain there for all the duty hours. The appellant in his position as Chowkidar sent an application against the Manager of the Factory that the Manager was a dishonest person, that while he spent Rs.5W in the course of his factory business he made the entry of Rs.2,000 and appropriated the balance for himself. As this was a serious charge, enquiries were made and the allegation was found to be totally false and malicious. A show‑cause notice under Standing Order 15(3)(h) was, accordingly, issued to the Chowkidar for this act subversive of discipline. The Director of the Tannery appointed Enquiry Officer who found the Chowkidar Makhzan guilty of misconduct. He was, therefore, awarded under Standing Order 15(3)(iv)‑ the punishment of dismissal from service. The appellant Chowkidar than proceeded under section 25‑A of the I.R.O. but without success. Ultimately he has filed this appeal.
3. The appellant's representative, Mr. Rana Mahmood Ali Khan, has argued that the punishment is very harsh and he could, at the most, have been awarded some minor penalty provided under Standing Order 15.
4. It is, on the other hand, pointed out by the learned Advocate for We respondents, Mr. NA. Talpur, that this is a case of wilful insubordination and mud‑slinging to blackmail his Manager, which cannot be lightly dealt with as it affects the entire discipline of the factory Management. I entirely agree with the learned counsel for the respondents that unless there is order in all such business Institutions in this country and blackmailers are severely punished, it will not be possible to carry on the administration smoothly.
5. The punishment is, therefore, maintained and the appeal is dismissed. H.B.T./2384/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.