Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Case No. 18 (19) of 1978, decided on 23rd May, 1978.
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of I968)‑
‑‑ S. O. 15 (4)‑Grievance of petitioner as to charge‑sheet served on hire being a belated one and to be placed before an Enquire Officer case being one of domestic enquiry‑Held, since legal objection raised not sustained by facts, matter needs no inter ference, in circumstances.
M. L. Shahani for Petitioner.
Muhammad Humayun for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 23rd May, 1978.
The question raised in this petition under section 6 of the Pakistan Essential Services (Maintenance) Act, 1952, is that the charge‑sheet served on the petitioner in respect of the misconduct was not in accordance with the Standing Order 15(4) of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, as it was not served within one month of the date of misconduct, It appears from the contents of the application and the submissions made at Bar that the petitioner is being proceeded against for manipulation ‑of overtime sheets from July 1976 to November, 19.78. He was served with a charge‑sheet. There after, he approached the Commission with an objection to the validity of the charge‑sheet and a prayer for issuance of interim stay restraining the respondent from holding the enquiry. I refused to issue interim stay but ordered that no final order detrimental to the interest of the petitioner shall be passed till the disposal of the petition before me.
2. Mr. Muhammad Humayun appears for the respondent. He has read out clause (4) of Standing Order 15 which says that the charge‑sheet shall be served within one month of the alleged misconduct or within one month of the date when it comes to the knowledge of the employer,.: It is his submission that the alleged misconduct spreads over a number of months and it came to the knowledge of the employer on 26th of Decem ber, 1977. The charge‑sheet was served on 17th of January, 1978, which means that the charge‑sheet was served within one month of the, knowledge of the misconduct by the employer.
3. Mr. Shahani submits that this matter be factually gone "into and the records in this connection be summoned before the Commission. I am not inclined to accede to this request. This is a domestic enquiry and the petitioner will have an opportunity to place the facts before the Enquiry Officer, if he thinks that the charge‑sheet was belated. The legal objection raised against the charge‑sheet has not been sustained by facts. There is no reason to interfere in this matter. This petition is dis missed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer