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. RI‑447 of 1985, decided on 14th December, 1985.
‑‑‑Charge‑sheet‑‑Charge of absence‑‑Letter neither mentioning details of absence nor employee asked to reply nor informed that action was to be taken‑‑Purpose of charge‑sheet not served‑‑Enquiry could not be, held, pursuant to such letter.
Ch. Sadiq Muhammad Warraich for Appellant.
Naeem Sultan Butt for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 7th December, 1985.
The decision, dated 14‑7‑1985 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 6, Rawalpindi has been challenged to the extent it allowed the respondent to hold fresh inquiry.
2. Notice of termination of services is Exh. P‑1. It is contended that the appellant was not taking interest in his duties and often remained absent. Exh. P‑1 does not serve the purpose of a charge‑sheet inasmuch as neither details of absence are given, nor the appellant was asked to reply to it, nor was informed that on account of the alleged absence action was, to be taken So on account of any absence before 7‑5‑1984 no charge‑sheet now can be given because if it is given now, it would be time‑barred. Without a charge‑sheet no question of holding inquiry arises. The learned lower Court while permitting inquiry forgot that no charge‑sheet had been given to the appellant. So the direction of holding inquiry on the allegations appearing in Exh. P‑1 could not be given. Since no legal inquiry can be held, the direction that back benefits would depend upon the result of the inquiry cannot be given. The learned lower Court has held that if no inquiry is held, the appellant would be entitled to back benefits. So the appellant entitled to the same. Even otherwise since the appellant asserted it his statement that he remained jobless from the date of termination of his services, he is entitled to the back benefits.
3. As a result, the appeal is accepted and setting aside the permission to hold the inquiry, the appellant is allowed back benefits.
A. E.
Appeal accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer