Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. HYD‑109 of 1970, heard on 30th April 1970.

---S. 37'‑labour Court not a Court of appeal over, findings of domestic enquiry‑[Road Transport case]‑Conductor, an office bearer of workers' Union, charge‑sheeted for misconduct‑No suggestion of victimisation due to Union activities Domestic enquiry being fair and impartial‑‑Contention that statements on behalf of Management before Enquiry Officer contained contradict rejected--Permission for dismissal granted by Labour Court upheld.

Wasiullah Qureshi for Appellant.

Mehboob Rizvi for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 30th April 19.70.

This is an appeal against an order of the learned Chairman of the First West Pakistan Labour Court, Karachi, dated, the 7^th February 1970. The impugned order was passed on an application under section 37(2) of the West Pakistan Industrial Dispute Ordinance, 1968 (hereinafter called the repealed Ordi nance), whereby the learned Court granted the permission to dismiss the appellant from service.

The appellant was charge‑sheeted for misconduct inasmuch as on checking the bus it was found that 10 passengers were travelling without tickets cut of whom the appellant 'Conductor had realised fare from 4 of the passengers. On enquiry the appellant was found guilty of the misconduct. The District Manager after hearing the appellant and perusing the enquiry report made on application under section 37 of the repealed Ordinance, for permission of the Court to dismiss the appellant, as he was an Office‑bearer of the G. T. S. Labour Union.

The learned Court came to the conclusion that a prima facie case had been made out against the appellant‑ for misconduct and granted the permission sought for.

Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi, the learned Representative for the appellant drew my attention to the statements on behalf of the Government Transport Service to indicate that there are contradictions. The Labour Court rightly did not go into these questions as it could not sit as a Court of Appeal over the findings arrived at by he Enquiry Officer in domestic enquiry, if: it was fair and impartial' and did not violate any principle of natural justice. The appellant failed to make out a case that he was being victimized for his Union activities. Mr. Abdul Qayoom, Traffic Assistant, who had checked the bus of the appellant was cross examined at great length. No question was put in cross‑examination to Mr. Qayoom to suggest that he had any motive to victimize 'the appellant. There is no suggestion in the cross‑examination of Mr. Qayoom that the appellant was an active worker of the Union. Similarly no question was put to Mr. Bashir Ali Assistant Traffic Manager, who was in the checking party, to disclose that he had any motive to harass or victimize the appellant. The learned Court rightly came to the conclusion that the enquiry was fair and impartial and in accordance with the principle of natural justice and that a prima facie case for misconduct was made out. In these circumstances I would dismiss the appeal.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.