1970 PLP 321 (PLC)
TRANSPORT SERVICE, SUKKUR Versus ALI MUHAMMAD AND ANOTHER
| Citation | 1970 PLP 321 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Industrial Appellate Tribunal west Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Inamullah Khan, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | TRANSPORT SERVICE, SUKKUR Versus ALI MUHAMMAD AND ANOTHER |
| Primary Law | Industrial dispute |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 PLP 321 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial dispute as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 PLP 321 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Industrial Appellate Tribunal west Pakistan bench comprising: Inamullah Khan, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1970 PLP 321 (PLC) (TRANSPORT SERVICE, SUKKUR Versus ALI MUHAMMAD AND ANOTHER). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mahboob Rizvi for Appellant.
- Nemo for Respondent No.1
- Date of hearing: 27th March 1970.
Headnotes / Summary
‑Domestic enquiry‑Explanation of work‑ 5 man discarded by Enquiry officer without any cogent reason finding of enquiry, in circumstances, held, perverse. Respondent, a bus conductor was charged of realising fare from passengers without issuing tickets. His explanation was that he could not issue tickets because he broke the point of his pencil. On enquiry from the passengers it appeared that they and also no pencil or sharpener. The explanation was supported by the prosecution itself but the Enquiry officer discarded the explanation without any cogent reasons. The findings of the enquiry, in the circumstances, were held perverse.
Judgment & Decree
Appeal No. SKR‑40 of 1970, decided on 27th March 1970. --‑Domestic enquiry‑Explanation of work‑ 5 man discarded by Enquiry officer without any cogent reason finding of enquiry, in circumstances, held, perverse. Respondent, a bus conductor was charged of realising fare from passengers without issuing tickets. His explanation was that he could not issue tickets because he broke the point of his pencil. On enquiry from the passengers it appeared that they and also no pencil or sharpener. The explanation was supported by the prosecution itself but the Enquiry officer discarded the explanation without any cogent reasons. The findings of the enquiry, in the circumstances, were held perverse. Mahboob Rizvi for Appellant. Nemo for Respondent No.1 Date of hearing: 27th March 1970. This is an appeal against an order under section 37 of the West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1968 refusing to grant permission to dismiss Ali Muhammad, respondent. The charge against Ali Muhammad was that he had realised fare from 5 passengers, but had not issued tickets to them. Ali Muhammad explained as to why he was not able to issue tickets to the 5 passengers. He stated before the Enquiry Officer and also in T. T. 40 Form that he broke the point of his pencil and was, therefore, unable to issue the tickets. On enquiry from the passengers, it appeared that they had also no pencil or sharpener.
2. The learned Chairman rightly came to the conclusion that the finding of the Enquiry Officer was perverse. The explanation offered by Ali Muhammad was supported by the prosecution itself. The admitted position being that the point of the pencil of Ali Muhammad, Conductor, had got broken and, therefore, he could not issue the tickets. In the absence of any cogent reason by the Enquiry Officer as to why the explanation of Ali Muhammad should have been discarded, the learned Court rightly came to the conclusion that the finding of the Enquiry Officer was perverse. The appeal is dismissed.
3. Ali Muhammad, respondent, is absent.