Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. S L‑398 of 1984, decided on 17th February, 1985.

‑‑Ss. 25‑A & 38 (3)‑Reinstatement‑Back benefits ‑ Disallowing back benefits‑Petitioner an ad hoc appointee‑Services terminated for misconduct‑No inquiry held‑Labour Court reinstating peti tioner but disallowing back benefits on ground of being merely ad hoc appointee‑Being ad‑hoc appointee, held, not a sufficient ground to disallow back benefits.

Muhammad Ashraf Chohan for Appellant.

Muhammad Zaman Qureshi for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 10th February, 1985.

The decision dated 5th June, 1984 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. Gujranwala has been challenged to the extent it disallowed back benefits to the appellant.

2. The appellant was appointed as unapproved technician tempora rily in stopgap arrangement on ad hoc basis. It was made clear to the appellant that for being regularised, he shall have to qualify competitive examination. On the ground of misbehaviour, unsatisfactory work and habitual late coming, the appellant was removed from service. The learned lower Court has directed the reinstatement of the appellant on the ground that although the allegations made against him amounted to misconduct, yet no inquiry was held. Back benefits were disallowed on the ground that his appointment was on ad‑hoc basis. This is not a sufficient ground for disallowing back benefits. But since the appellant did not prove that after his termination of service, he remained jobless, he is not entitled to back benefits.

3. As a result, the appeal fails and is 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.