Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. 679 of 1982, decided on 19th December, 1982.

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑--

--‑‑ Ss. 25‑A & 38‑‑Railway employee‑Promotion‑Cannot be claimed as a right‑Promotion to be made on basis of seniority -cum‑fitness‑Fitness to be determined by employer‑Petitioner not found fit for promotion due to repeated punishment of W. I. T-Grievance petition against non‑inclusion in promotion panel, in circumstances. held, rightly dismissed by Labour Court.

Muhammad Anwar Lodhi for Appellant.

Date of hearing : 14th December, 1982.

In this appeal, the decision dated 21st October, 1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 4 has been challenged whereby grievance petition of the appellant was dismissed. Divisional Promotion Committee prepared a panel of promotion not including the name of the appellant in it. This actuated the appellant to move the grievance petition.

Incumbents are to be promoted to the next higher post from the panel recommended by the Divisional Promotion Committee. Since the name of appellant has not been included in the panel, fearing that he may not be promoted, he challenged the panel. Needless to say that promotion is not a right and that such a question is decided on the basis of seniority‑cum -fitness. If there is any dispute regarding seniority the aggrieved person may come to the Court but question of fitness for promotion is to be determined by the employer. In the present case, the B ‑Card of the appellant was brought on the record by the respondent which shows that for seven times the punishment of W. I. T. was awarded to the appellant. It is not shown if the punishments were withdrawn by the higher authority. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that if any incumbent is undergoing punish ment of stopping of increment, he cannot be promoted. This is true but the punishments of W. I. T. were awarded to the appellant ‑much before the question of promotion arose, Not only that the persons who are serving the punishment cannot be considered for promotion but even those persons whose record is not unblemished may be considered as not fit for promotion. The argument of the learned counsel is without force that the punishment of W. I. P. and not. W. I. T. can be considered for determining whether a particular employee is not fit for promotion. Even a punishment of W. I. T. awarded several times may be considered to decide whether the person is fit for promotion.

In the circumstances discussed above, no interference is called for.. The appeal, therefore, is dismissed in limine for want of any force.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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