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. KAR-45 of 1985, heard on 12th September, 1985.
---S. 25-A--Scope--Adverse remarks by superior--No infringement of right--Expunction of adverse remarks beyond jurisdiction of Labour Court.
Mirza Muhammad Kazim for Appellant.
Kamal Mansoor Alam for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 12th September, 1985.
This is an appeal against the impugned order of Sind Labour Court No. IV at Karachi, dated 16-1-1985, whereby it had dismissed the grievance petition of the appellant.
2. The facts are that appellant was a workman of the respondents Pakistan Steel Mills from March, 1977, and that he had earned all along good reports from his bosses. He had fallen ill and had requested for leave of four weeks and he after the leave reported for duty on 1-11-1982. After the return of the appellant from the leave, Mr. Samiullah, his incharge showed biased attitude against him. His pay was stopped and his further increments were stopped after holding the enquiry and, therefore, the appellant filed a grievance petition. It seems that the grievance was still pending before the Labour Court.
3. In the instant case the grievance of the appellant was that he was given adverse report on account of Mr. Samiullah being prejudiced and that he has prayed for expunction of adverse reports. This grievance is, therefore, for the expunction of adverse reports.
4. The matter was argued by Mr. Mirza Muhammad Kazim, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Kamal Mansoor Alam, the Advocate for the Pakistan Steel. Mr. Kamal Mansoor Alam raised a plea that the expunction of adverse report does not come within the mischief of section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969. The section 25-A would apply when there is an infringement of the right of the appellant or his secured rights are violated. The adverse report is passed by the superior adjudicating the work of the appellant and these reports cannot be called to be infringement of the rights so that they may give a cause of action to the appellant. Mr. Mirza Muhammad Kazim capitalized the bias and prejudice of the superiors of the appellant but these facts are not relevant so far a petition under section 25-A, I. R. O., 1969, is concerned.
5. In the result the expunction of the adverse remarks is beyond the jurisdiction of the Labour Court and as such the appeal 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