Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
1984 P L C 947
Appeal No. QSA‑324 of 1983, decided on 6th July, 1.983:
Dismissal for misconduct‑Disciplinary action against accused reduced to form of a note and read over to Managing Director on telephone and he approving dismissal of accused‑Labour Court, in circumstances, held, rightly awarded re‑instatement directing Managing Director to himself go through enquiry proceedings and record his own findings‑Contention that instead of passing fresh order a fresh enquiry should have been ordered‑Rejected= Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25‑A & 38(3).
Ch. Muhammad 1kram for Appellant.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 3rd July, 1983.
In this appeal the decision, dated 29th May, 1983 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 3, Lahore at Ferozewala has been challenged, whereby the appellant was re‑instated in service and the Managing Director was directed to pass fresh orders within two months. It was further directed that if fresh order was not passed within two months, the appellant would stand re‑instated with back benefits.
2. The defects pointed out by the learned lower Court were that disciplinary action was reduced to the form of a note which was read over to the Managing Director on telephone when the Managing Director was at Islamabad and he approved the dismissal. Direction has been given by the learned lower Court to the Managing Director to himself go through the enquiry proceedings and to record his own findings.
3. Learned counsel for the 'appellant has argued that instead of giving direction for passing fresh order, fresh enquiry should have been ordered. I do not find any force in this argument. Since the learned lower Court found that the Managing Director had not applied his mind IA and had not himself perused the proceedings, therefore, he directed that fresh order be passed after going through the proceedings. The impugned order is just and proper and no interference is called for.
4. The appeal has no force and thus is dismissed in limine.
A. E. Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer