Railway Employee

Petitioner was retired employee of Pakistan Railways and his grievance was that authorities declined to reimburse his medical bill

Validity

Doctor of Railway hospital, had not admitted the petitioner in the hospital and compelled him to purchase prescriptive/diagnosed injections/medicines from open market and petitioner who was suffering from chronic disease having no other option resorted to purchase advised medicines from open market, as such petitioner could not be penalized for no fault on his part

Provision of health and education facilities are deemed to be the primary responsibility of the State in civilized societies

Petitioner who was retired employee of Pakistan Railways, was running behind State Functionaries for reimbursement of an amount which he had spent for purchase of medicines advised by doctor of Railway hospital because the injections/medicines were not available in that hospital which otherwise were required to be provided by the hospital authorities

Petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of bills for local purchased medicines/injections, as advised by doctor of Railway hospital

High Court directed the authorities to reimburse the amount spent by petitioner in respect of prescriptive injections/medicines of doctor of Railway Hospital

Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

Railway employees-Admissibility of piece rate profit-Allowed to workers of Workshops production units-Truck drivers having no contribution to production of articles-Not entitled to piece rate profit-Amount drawn prior to amendment clarifying such position, held, cannot be recovered from Truck-drivers.

Assistant Chargemen and Chargemen (designated as Sub-Engineers) Grade-I and II working as Draftsmen and not actually in workshop

Held: Entitled to consolidated piece rate profit @ 33 1/3% allowed to productive and non-productive units of Mughalpura Workshops.

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25-A & 38(3).

Senior, in circumstances, held, prejudiced and order of Labour Court accepting grievance petition against non-promotion upheld by Appellate Tribunal

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. .25-A & 38(3).

Held: Period of suspension till expiry of three months was legal and subsequent there being without sanction of competent authority was illegal

Heirs of deceased, held, entitled to back benefits for period of illegal suspension.

Ss. 25-A & 37-Railway employee-Claim for wages of suspension period-Employee placed under suspension due to being in Police custody on account of criminal case but re-instated after acquittal by criminal Court-Labour Court holding that acquittal was to be construed as honourable acquittal and allowing claim for full pay for entire suspension period-Judgment of Criminal Court indicative that acquittal was on account of benefit of doubt-Order of competent authority allowing only suspension allowances, in circumstances, upheld, and order of Labour Court set aside by Labour Appellate Tribunal

Pakistan Railways Establishment Code, Vol II, rr. 2043 & 2044.

Railway Employee -Appearing as defence witness for railway employee accused under S. 101, Railways Act (IX of 1890) but not coming forward to make a statement during investigation of case-Liable to be dealt with departmentally for breach of duty.