Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. LHR‑600 of 1982, decided on 12th December, 1983.

‑‑ Ss. 25‑A & 38(3) ‑ Grievance petition against termination of service‑Workman tendering resignation and receiving dues in full and final setllement of his claim‑Estopped from bringing grievance petition for re‑instatement‑Labour Court, in circumstances, held, rightly dismissed grievance petition.

S. M. R. Anwar for Appellant.

Muhammad Zaman Qureshi for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 7th December, 1983.

The appeal titled above emerges from the decision, dated 20th September, 1982 delivered by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore, dismissing the grievance petition of the appellant for his re‑instatement in service.

2. An industrial dispute was raised by the C. B. A. union but the dispute was settled on the agreement that as the raw material was not available, the workers may resign and would be re‑employed on the re‑start of the Mills. The appellant and other workers resigned and received their dues. The appellant, however, denies to have given any resignation. Besides his own statement there is no evidence on the record to show that the appellant did not execute any resignation. His case is that on blank paper his thumb‑impressions were received. This statement in the absence of cogent evidence was rightly disbelieved by the learned lower Court. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal R. W. 1 was the counsel for the C. B. A. in the industrial dispute and he had scribed all the resignations. He said categorically that in his presence the appellant had thumb‑marked the resignation and had received his dues. There was no enmity between the appellant and R. W. 1. so why he may have acted as a tool in the hands of the respondent in the victimization of the appellant. The President of the Union P. W. 2 too deposed against the appellant. There is overwhelm ing evidence of the fact that the appellant did execute resignation Exh. R. 1 by thumb‑marking it after it was on his asking scribed by Mr. Muhammad Iqbal, Advocate R. W. I. The appellant received his dues in full and final settlement of his claim and was estopped from bringing application under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 for his re‑instatement in service. His petition was therefore rightly dismissed by the learned lower Court.

3. As a result of what has been said above, the appeal fails and is hereby 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.