Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 529‑S of 1977, decided on Sth June, 1077.

‑‑S. 38 (3)‑Appellate jurisdiction of Labour Appellate Tribunal sitting in appeal over judgment of Labour Court can reverse every finding of fact arrived at by Labour Court and also can disagree with it on every question of law Cannot, however, pass a verdict on conjectural grounds‑Workman dismissed from service on charge of loss of employer's property during his duty Labour Court finding that findings of enquiry were only conjectural awarded re-instatement-No direct evidence to show that accused workman had a hand in disappearance of article alleged to have been missing though found subsequently‑Labour Appellate Tribunal observing that possibility of workman being responsible for disappearance of article could not be excluded and thus setting aside order of Labour' Court‑Observations of Labour Appellate Tribunal indicative that guilt of workman bad not been established and possibility of his innocence could not be excluded‑Order of Labour Appellate Tribunal, it, circumstances, declared by High Court as without lawful authority and of no legal effect‑Writ jurisdiction‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199.

A & B Rafiq Ahmad Sabir for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing : 8th June, 1977.

The petitioner was a Chowkidar employed by the Government Transport Service, Lyallpur. On the allegation that a certain com- pressure pump was lost from a depot of the Government Transport Service, Lyallpur, while the petitioner was on duty as a Chowkidar, he was charge‑sheeted and dismissed after due inquiry into the allegation.

The inquiry officer found him responsible for the loss, although the pump was later found and restored. However, on an application moved by the petitioner under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, the learned Ln0our Court concerned directed his reinstatement with back benefits.

The view of the learned Labour Court was that the finding of the inquiry officer was only conjectural. However, on appeal by the District Manager, Government Transport Service, Lyallpur, the learned Appellate Tribunal reversed the learned Labour Court's order and dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance. Hence this writ petition.

It is to be noted at the very outset that the ground on which the learned Appellate Tribunal accepted the appeal is that the possibility of the respondent himself (petitioner) being responsible for the dis. appearance of the pump cannot be excluded This observation by itself indicates that the petitioner's guilt had not been established and the possibility of his innocence could not be excluded, either. This is a case where there is no direct evidence to show that the petitioner had a hand in the removal of the pump. Circumstantial evidence was not conclusive inasmuch as it was not inconsistent with the innocence of the petitioner. On the relevant ‑date three Chowkidars including the petitioner changed shifts. And it was one of them who reported the pump missing. Therefore, the possibility of the informant being responsible for the disappearance of the pump could not be ruled out. At any rate the pump was found in the Transport Depot at Jhang where it in fact belonged. In these circumstances the learned Labour Court was justified in directing the reinstatement of the petitioner and the learned Appellate Tribunal had no authority to interfere with the decision of the learned Labour Court merely on the basis of a possibility of the petitioner being responsible for the disappearance of the pump Sitting in appeal over the judgment of the learned Labour Court, the learned Appellate Tribunal certainly has the jurisdiction to reverse every finding of fact arrived at by the former and also to disagree with it on every question of law but no Court or Tribunal has the authority to pass a verdict on conjectural grounds.

This writ petition is accordingly accepted and the impugned order of the learned Appellate Tribunal is declared to be without lawful B authority and of no legal effect. The parties shall, however, bear them own costs.

A. E. Appeal accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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