Reasons for termination

2019 PLC 86 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

S. 33Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 2(i), S.Os. 12 & 15Redressal of individual grievances"Workman"ScopeTermination of employment of permanent-workerReasons for terminationInquiry to be conducted before terminationScope

Employer assailed order of National Industrial Relations Commission whereby grievance petition of worker was accepted and his termination was set aside

Contentions of employer were that under the terms of employment it had the right to terminate worker's services by giving him one month's notice or salary in lieu thereof; that termination letter did not stigmatize the worker or adversely affect his future employment prospects and that worker was not a "workman"

Validity

Termination letter when read in isolation did not show that worker's services were terminated due to misconduct however, employer hurled many allegations of misconduct against worker in its reply to grievance notice and reply filed before Labour Court

Employer could not be permitted to take a position inconsistent with the one taken by it in said replies qua the actual reason for worker's termination

Several allegations of misconduct had been leveled against the worker, therefore, it was obligatory for the employer to have conducted an inquiry as required by S.O. 12(5) & 15(4) of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968

Employer was required to give reasons in writing for terminating the services of a permanent worker

Simple information to an employee that his services were no longer required was not a reason good enough for termination of services and did not justify the requirement of S.O. 12(3)

Worker's designation as per his appointment letter was "Transport Assistant", but he was performing duties of a driver

Duty of driver predominantly involved manual work, therefore, he came within the meaning of a "workman"

Constitutional petition was dismissed.

2019 PLC 86 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

SOs. 12 & 15Termination of employmentReasons for terminationInquiry to be conducted before dismissalScope

One month's notice must be given by employer before terminating employment of a permanent workman for any reason other than misconduct

One month's wages calculated on the basis of average wages earned by the workman during the last three months must be paid in lieu of notice

Services of a workman were not to be terminated nor could a workman be removed, retrenched, discharged or dismissed from service except by an order in writing, which must explicitly state the reason for the action taken

Explicit statement of reasons for termination of workman's services through an order in writing was obligatory

Standing Order 12(5) prohibited an employer from terminating the services of a permanent or a temporary workman on the ground of misconduct, in a manner other than the one prescribed in S.O. 15

No order of dismissal could be made unless the workman was informed in writing of the alleged misconduct within one month of the date of such misconduct or of the date on which the alleged misconduct came to the notice of the employer and given an opportunity to explain the circumstances alleged against him

Approval of the employer was required in every case of dismissal and the employer must initiate independent inquiries before dealing with charges against a workman.

2016 PLC(CS) 155 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art. 14Inviolability of dignity of man, etc.Civil serviceTermination from serviceReasons for termination

Every termination order must carry reasons and this was equally applicable to the case of termination simpliciter and there was no plausible explanation why a public authority must shy away from giving reasons for termination

To withhold reasons for termination of a civil servant generated a host of adverse assumptions against the character of a civil servant which had a bearing on his reputation and goodwill and failure of disclosing or intentional withholding of reasons was, therefore, below the dignity of any white collared officer and offended Art.14 of the Constitution.