Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. LHR-702 of 1980, decided on 17th January, 1983.

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)-

.--- Ss. 25-A & 37 read with West Pakistan Industrial and Com mercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. O. 15 (3) (e)-Absence without leave for more than 10 days- Leave application on medical grounds made-Rejection of applica tion not communicated--Domestic enquiry held without asking accused whether he wanted to examine any person in defence Dismissal from service in circumstances, held, rightly set aside by Labour Court awarding reinstatement without back benefits. (p, 225)A

Muhammad 1gbal Khokhur for Appellant.

Respondent in person. .

Date of hearing : 4th December, 1982.

This appeal arises from the decision dated 28th August, ,1980 passed

by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 1, Lahore,

whereby the grievance petition of the respondent was accepted and he was directed to be re-instated in service without back,benefits.

2. The allegation against the respondent was that he became absent from 21st August, 1979. Absent report was made by the Time Keeper on 18th September, 1979. Charge-sheet was sent to the respondent at his home address but it came back unserved with the report that he had gone out of Lahore and it was not known where he was. The respondent had sent application.for leave, the copy of which is Exh. D-10 accompanied by a medical certificate issued by Mayo .Hospital which was rejected on 8th September, 1979. The medical certificate recommended leave for one month and 25 days. No intimation about the rejection of leave application was conveyed to the respondent. The respondent had joined duty on 16th October, 1979. The certificate was referred to the Mayo Hospital for verification, from where the reply was received that the certi ficate had not been issued by the Hospital. The reply of the Medical Superintendent of Mayo Hospital is Exh. D-7.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that since in the grievance notice and the grievance petition it was not said that the intimation of rejection of leave application was not conveyed, this point cannot be considered at the appellate stage. Since the respondent did not know that any order of rejection of leave had been recorded, therefore,l such an objection could not be raised. The enquiry was not properly made inasmuch as no opportunity of defence was given to the respondent. It was not enquired from him if he wanted to examine any A person in defence. In these circumstances, the respondent was rightly directed to be re-instated in service without back benefits. The appeal is# without any force and is thus dismissed.

A. E.

Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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