Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. Kar. 457 of 1983, heard on 23rd December, 1984.

‑‑‑Ss.2(xxviii), 25‑A & 38(3)‑‑West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.2(i)‑‑Bank employee‑‑Grade II Officer working as Branch Manager holding Power of‑Attorney from Bank and several persons working under him‑‑Not a workman‑‑Order of Labour Court dismissing grievance petition against termination of services as not maintainable, in circumstances, upheld by Appellate Tribunal.

M. M. Jeelani for Appellant.

Date of hearing: 23^rd December, 1984.

The appellant has filed the instant appeal against the impugned order of the Sind Labour Court No.V at Karachi, dated 22‑8‑1983, whereby he has dismissed the grievance petition of the appellant.

2. Briefly the facts are that the appellant was serving the respondent‑Bank since July, 1967 and on 15‑5‑1980, he tendered resignation. Thereafter he went away to Khartum, Sudan, and joined the Bank of Oman Ltd., and worked there till 8‑3‑1981. The appellant came to Pakistan as his father was dead. He re‑joined the respondent Bank on 1‑4‑1981 during his absence from 16‑5‑1980 to the date of his report to work was counted as leave without pay. On 2‑5‑1981, he reported for duty before the Vice‑President, Faisalabad Branch. On 12‑9‑1981, he reported for duty to Executive Vice‑President, Personnel Division, Head Office, Karachi. He was asked to produce the clearance certificate from the Bank of Oman Ltd., which he undertook to produce but he could not do so upto the time his services were terminated. He proceeded on leave from 23‑11‑1981 to 29‑11‑1981 and subsequently he proceeded to Lahore on the marriage of his sister and made an application/ for leave from 28‑11‑1981 to 7‑1‑1982. Then, the appellant fell ill and sent a telegram from Lahore to extend the leave. Ultimately he was removed from service by a letter, dated 10‑4‑1982. He, therefore filed the grievance petition.

3. The respondent's statement is to the effect that the grievance petition is not maintainable as the appellant was never employed as a workman in the respondent‑Bank and as such the Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 as well as the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, were not applicable. He was appointed as Grade II officer previously and also he re‑joined as Grade II officer as such. The appellant remained absent without leave and on account of his continued un-authorised absence on one pretext or the other, he deliberately remained absent. The appellant did not produce the Clearance Certificate from the Bank of Oman Ltd., in spite of repeated demands. The appellant had himself undertaken to produce the Clearance Certificate from the Bank of Oman Ltd., on the basis of which he was allowed to re ‑join the bank.

4. The appellant filed his affidavit in evidence and he was cross- examined. The respondent‑Bank filed an affidavit in evidence by one, Akbar Sultan, and he was also cross‑examined. The arguments of learned counsel for the parties namely, M.M. Jeelani and Iqbal Habib were heard by me.

5. The main contention of the respondent‑Bank is that Grade II Officer is not a workman. The appellant himself has at working that he was appointed as an officer, Grade II. The appellant was working as Manager in various branches of the bank till his resignation. Many persons were working under the appellant and the appellant re-joined the bank as Grade II officer. Even in the Bank of Oman Ltd., in the working as Grade II officer. The appellant has also cross‑examination that he was holding the Power of Attorney on behalf of the respondent‑Bank which he produced as Exh.3‑A. The duties performed by the appellant and the persons working under him as the appellant was Manager and Officer, Grade II. It establishes that the appellant was not a workman under the provisions of Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 as well as Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969.

6. The re‑joining of the appellant with the respondent‑Bank was with a condition that he would produce Clearance Certificate from the Bank of Oman Ltd. The appellant failed to do so. These were arrears of the Bank of Oman Ltd., against the appellant ant, this fact has been admitted by the appellant himself. The arrears were not cleared off. The appellant further absented from duty without permission and without sanction of the leave.

7. Considering the facts on record and considering the arguments of the learned Advocates of the parties, I am satisfied that the appeal has no force as the grievance petition was not maintainable. The appeal is accordingly 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.