Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. BR‑340 of 1984, decided on 9^th July, 1984.

‑‑‑Ss. 25‑A & 38(3)‑‑‑Termination of service purportedly due to abolition of post‑‑No justification' for abolition of post‑‑Services of workman (respondent) earlier terminated twice on different grounds but re‑instated once in pursuance of writ petition and once under orders of Labour Court‑‑Employer (appellant,) determined to get rid of him on supposed grounds‑‑Order of Labour Court re‑instating workman (respondent) in circumstances, upheld by Appellate Tribunal.

Naeem Sultan Butt for Appellant.

Date of hearing: 27^th June, 1984.

The appeal captioned above challenges the decision dated 3‑6‑1984 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.8, Bahawalpur, whereby the respon0ent has been directed to be reinstated in service.

2. The case has a checkered history. The respondent was previously dismissed on the allegation of inciting workers to go on strike. The order of dismissal was set aside in writ and fresh enquiry was allowed. The respondent was again dismissed but he was directed by the learned lower court to be reinstated. This time his services have been terminated on the plea of abolition of his post. The respondent is a qualified dispenser and was serving as resident doctor in the dispensary of the Mills. No ground for abolition of the post is given in the order of termination. However, in evidence it was said that the dispensary had been taken over by the Social Security, but this fact too was not established. It has been argued that c n account of the application of the Social Security Ordinance, the workers get treatment from the Social Security hospital and the dispensary has been converted into a first aid post. Firstly, there is no sufficient evidence in support of this argument and secondly even a first aid post cannot function and exist without a doctor. Obviously if the services of a qua are utilized for giving first aid, the wounds of he workers are apt to become septic or even tetanus may develop as usually wounds are caused by dirty implements or machinery made up of iron.

3. The history of the case displays that the respondent is considered as an undesirable person. The Management was obliged to re‑instate him and comply with the order of the learned lower Court and now he has been derived to be get rid of by termination on the supposed ground of converting the dispensary into a first aid post. It is manifest that since the dispensary exists, still the services of a doctor are required. The learned lower Court thus rightly directed the reinstatement of the respondent in service.

4. As a result, the appeal fails and is dismissed in limine.

A. E.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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