1998 PLP 133 (PLC)

Khadim Hussain for Appellant. Muhammad Humayun for Respondents. Date of hearing: 18th March, 1997. This appeal is directed against the order of Vth Sindh Labour Court, Karachi, dismissing the grievance petition of the appellant under section 25-A of the I.R.O. for reinstatement and back benefits.

2. This is a very interesting story for waiter obtaining fresh employments by concealment of his previous record and by changing his name from Tanveer Hussain to Hussain Tanveer and H. Tanveer.

3. The appellant was appointed as a waiter at the Karachi Marriat Hotel. He applied for the job by filling up the columns of the Employment Application. One of these columns was employment record. The appellant showed his previous employment with Taj Mahal Hotel. Sky Room Restaurant Airport. The Inn Airport, Shazia Coffee Shop, Avari Towers Outdoor Catering. He was appointed as a Waiter on 18-5-1992. Prior to this job with Marriat Hotel, the appellant was serving as a steward at the Karachi Gymkhana. On 17-3-1991 he was charge-sheeted and suspended for having misbehaved and insulted a Lady Member of the Club. After domestic enquiry he was dismissed on 14-4-1991. The appellant had moved the Labour Court against that dismissal and showed that he was not gainfully employed anywhere but was jobless. The Karachi Gymkhana found that the appellant had obtained employment with the Five Star Hotel known as Marriat Hotel, Victoria Road. The Marriat Hotels were, therefore, by Karachi Gymkhana through a letter, dated 20th February, 1993 that they have come to know that they had employed ex-employee of the Gymkhana by name Tanveer Hussain s/o Muhammad Hussain. That the said Tanveer Hussain was working at the Club as a steward with effect from 1-2-1989 to 14-4-1991 when he was dismissed from service after enquiry and had now filed a petition against Karachi Gymkhana showing himself to be jobless and the petition was still pending. This was considered a serious matter that a person dismissed for misconduct and misbehaviour with Lady member at the club was employed as a waiter at a prestigious Hotel by suppressing this fact which according to the Hotel Rules he was bound to disclose. He was, therefore, charge-sheeted and dismissed from service of Hotel Marriat. He again filed another grievance petition for his dismissal before Sindh Labour Court No. V, Karachi. The learned Labour Court found that the appellant had been rightly dismissed from service and, therefore, dismissed the petition under section 25-A of the I.R.O.

4. It has been argued by Mr. Khadim Hussain that suppression of the fact that he served as steward at the Karachi Gymkhana and was dismissed on the charge of misbehaving with the lady member does not fall under the definition of misconduct under Order 15(3)(a to 1). It has on the other hand been shown by Mr. Muhammad Humayun for the Marriat Hotel that in the application for the job the waiter was required to show his entire employment record, the position held, salary and reasons for leaving. The appellant had not mentioned the job at the Gymkhana and had suppressed the reasons that he was dismissed for misbehaviour with the lady member. Under Order 15(3)(b) any act or omission showing fraud or dishonesty with the business of the employer shall be treated as misconduct. If the appellant had not suppressed this important fact which he was required to show in the Application Form he would not have been employed as a waiter at the Hotel. Thus, he obtained the job as a waiter by fraud and dishonesty. His conduct, therefore, clearly came within the definition of "misconduct" and this misconduct has been proved by documentary evidence of letter from Karachi Gymkhana, the judgment in the case showing his dismissal and the employment application where the fact was omitted. The appellant has been getting employments under assumed names and aliases and very likely he has defrauded other institutions also. The character of the man is doubtful and he is not fit to be employed as a waiter in Five Star Hotel.

5. The order of the Labour Court is accordingly maintained and this appeal is dismissed. H.B.T./231/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.