Find a Lawyer

GHULAM MUHAMMAD versus SHAH MURAD SUGAR MILLS THROUGH FACTORY GENERAL MANAGER

Sections 46, 47 (3) and 48 of the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VII 1968), section O15 apply for termination of employment on charges of corruption Appeal Employee to charge sheet and inquire against Was subsequently dismissed. In a charge of dismissal by the Labor Court on the complaint filed by the employees against their dismissal, the employee had filed an appeal that the employee had a full and fair opportunity to participate in the cross-inquiry proceedings that the employee had provided to the cross-inquiry officer. Examined all witnesses presenting before. After the length and recording of witness statements, the employee's signature was obtained on each page of the inquiry process. The inquiry against the employee was not subjected to any kind of illegality or weakness, nor was it brought on record to enter any independent evidence. No Inquiry by the Inquiry Officer In any inquiry, dismissing the employee on the basis of the recommendation of the Inquiry Officer was not a result of prejudice or misconduct against the employee The employee also did not take any evidence to prove that Any personal grudge, prejudice or enmity against the inquiry officer is proved to be his crime. The Labor Court should not be subjected to any kind of illegality or weakness in relation to committing misconduct, their appeal cannot be interfered with by the High Court. property advocate from Sikandarabad lawyer