Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Revision Petition No. JG‑236 of 1984, decided on 22nd October, 1984.
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)‑
‑‑S. O. 15(3)‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25‑A & 38(3‑a)‑Misconduct‑Workman a Store‑Supervisor custodian of employer's property ‑ Failing to adopt security measures resulting in pilferage‑Charge of neglect of duty‑Amount to misconduct‑Plea that allegations did not amount to misconduct therefore, Labour Court should have stopped from awarding punish ment pending application under S. 25‑A‑Plea rejected and order of Labour Court refusing to stop employer from deciding enquiry, in circumstances, upheld by Appellate Tribunal in revision.
Malik Muhammad Asghar for Petitioner.
Date of hearing : 20th October, 1984.
The order dated 22nd September, 1984 passed by the Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 5, Faisalabad, refusing to stop the respondent from deciding the enquiry, is reported to be illegal and without jurisdiction.
2. The line of argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the allegations do not amount to misconduct and thus the respondent can be stopped from awarding any punishment before the decision of the main application given under section 25‑A. One of the allegations is that the petitioner being the custodian of the property of the respondent failed to adopt security measures which resulted in the pilferage of the respon dents goods. The charge is of neglect of duty which prima facie amounts to misconduct. The petitioner thus has no prima facie case and the petition for temporary injunction was rightly refused.
3. As a result the revision is dismissed in limine.
A.E.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer