Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. LHR‑490 of 1982, heard on 23rd November, 1982.

‑‑ Domestic enquiry‑ Charge‑sheet and enquiry notice sent not through registered post but under postal certificate‑No presumption of receipt thereof could arise‑Enquiry, in circumstances, held, invalid and ultimate dismissal order not sustainable‑Charge‑sheet having not been served permission for fresh enquiry also could not be granted because fresh charge‑sheet if served would be time‑barred‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25‑A & 38(3) and West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Stand ing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 15(4).

Mian Muhammad Yasin for Appellant.

Date of hearing : 23rd November, 1982.

This appeal arises from the decision, dated 26th July, 1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 2, Lahore whereby the res pondent was directed to be re‑instated without back benefit.

2. The respondent obtained leave from 10th April, 1979 to 13th April, 1979 and went to Karachi as his mother‑in‑law was ill there. He himself fell ill there and sent intimation to the appellant by post. He reported for duty on 14th June, 1979 but was delivered dismissal letter, dated 14th May, 1979. The learned lower Court has directed the re‑instatement of the res pondent on the sole ground that charge‑sheet and inquiry notice were sent not by registered post but under postal certificates. No presumption arises that letters sent under postal certificate were received by the addressee. Such a presumption arises if letters are sent on the correct address by re gistered post. Such letters do not come back if not delivered to the addressee whereas registered unserved letters come back to the sender. Again registered letters are personally handed over to the addressee and a receipt is taken but letters sent under postal certificates being ordinary letters are not delivered personally nor any receipt is taken but are thrown in the buildings. The respondent categorically denied the receipt of any such letters. The learned lower Court was, therefore, right in holding that service of charge‑sheet and inquiry notice was not proved. The inquiry was, therefore, invalid and the dismissal based upon it being unsustainable was rightly set aside by the learned lower Court.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has in the last resort argued that permission for re-inquiry be given. This request also cannot be accepted because no charge‑sheet was served and now the charge‑sheet according to Standing Order 15(4) of the Employment Standing Orders (Ordinance), 1968 has become time‑barred. Within one month of the occurrence of the misconduct charge‑sheet is to be served. The matter is of April, 1979 and now it is the end of November, 1982.

4. As a result of the observations made above I do not find any force in the appeal and dismiss it.

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.