Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Appeal No. LHR‑1042 of 1978, decided on 28th February, 1982.
‑‑‑ Reduction in rank‑‑Junior Clerk of Urban Transport Corporation posted as Assistant Cashier‑‑Such postings made not by rotation but on basis of seniority and carrying special pay of Rs.30 p.m.‑‑Re‑posting as Junior Clerk, in circumstances, held, amounts to reduction in rank‑ Re‑posting made due to alleged misconduct with stigma‑‑Re‑posting without enquiry, in circumstances, held, rightly set‑aside by Labour Court with directions for reposting as Assistant Cashier with back benefits‑‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25‑A 8 38(3).
Muhammad Salim Khan for Appellant.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 30th January, 1982.
The respondent was employed as Junior Clerk on 1‑3‑1976 in the Lahore Omnibus Service, Saddar Depot, Lahore and or. 29‑11‑1976 he was posted as Assistant Cashier. The latter post carries a special pay of Rs.30 per mensem. He was charge‑sheeted on 26‑5‑1977 for the misappropriation of Rs.100 by depositing Rs.57.88 only, whereas he had received Rs.157.88 from a conductor for deposit. He had under the pressure of the Accounts Officer and the cashier deposited the amount of Rs.100 on the same day. He was charge‑sheeted and reverted to the post of Junior Clerk.
2. It has been argued that as the posts of Junior Clerk and the Assistant Cashier belong to the same category, it was not a case of reversion or demotion. No doubt, the two posts belong to the same national pay scale No. 5, but since the post of Assistant Cashier carries a special pay of Rs.30 per month, the reposting of the respondent as Junior Clerk amounts to reduction in rank. Since on account of the alleged misconduct, the respondent was reposted as Junior Clerk, he was stigmatised, making of enquiry was, therefore, necessary. If the policy of posting Junior Clerk as Assistant Cashier by rotation had been prevailing there could have been no grievance to the respondent. This is obvious that on the basis of seniority from Junior Clerks, posting is made an Assistant Cashier. So the respondent being senior could not have been reposted as Junior Clerk. The Labour Court, therefore, rightly set aside the order passed by the appellant and directed the reposting of the respondent as Assistant Cashier with back benefits. The appeal is without force and is dismissed.
A.E
Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer