Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. FD-683 of 1982/Pb., decided on 26th January, 1983.

West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)-

--S.Os. 12 (5), 15 (4) read with S. O. 1 (d)-Badli workman" Remains in service till workman in whose temporary absence he is appointed resumes duty-Badli becomes permanent if he completes three)months or 183 days-Such Badli workman to be given alternate job if available when temporary absentee resumes duty and in case there is no job he is to be terminated and entitled to be recalled if and when any vacancy occurs-Badli workman having acquired status of a permanent workman by serving more than 183 days, held, could not be removed from service due to misconduct without procedure of S. O 15 (4).

Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah for Appellant.

Date of hearing : 19th January, 1983,

This appeal arises from the decision dated 14th October, 1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 4, Faisal abad, whereby the respondent was directed to be reinstated in service.

2. The respondent was employed as Ward Servant on 6th October, 1980 in the leave vacancy of Muhammad Anwar and continued up to 27th March, 1982 when his services were terminated on the ground that he was found absent. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondent was a Badli and neither a temporary nor a permanent employee, so could be terminated without holding any enquiry against him. The argument is without any force. A badli remains in service till the employee, in whose temporary absence he was employed. resumes duty. If he becomes permanent he is to be given alternate job, if available, when the temporary absentee resumes duty. If there is no job, he is terminated and is entitled to be recalled if and when any vacancy occurs. According to the definition of permanent workman given in Standing Order 1, a Badli becomes permanent if he completes three months or 183 days. The respondent served as Badli from 6th October, 1980 to 27th March, 1982 and thus became permanent. Since the allegation of misconduct was against him. Standing Order 12 (5) was applicable and thus for his removal following of procedure given in Standing Order 15 (4) was necessary. Since it was not done, he was rightly directed to be rein stated in service.

3. As upshot of the observations made above, I do not find any force in the appeal and dismiss it in limine.

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.