;MUNICIPAL COMMIT;,-C;, TANDO ALLAH YAR versus ANIS JAVED
Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Section 25 Service Refused Respondent, who was employed by the municipal committee as a lineman, was charged with absent from duty, which was not proved against him in the inquiry proceedings. But during the interrogation it was determined that some of the items in the tools were not collected by him despite the letters issued by them. The second charge sheet was issued to the respondents and after the domestic investigation the inquiry officer said that Has examined only two prosecution witnesses, one of whom was present in the presence of the respondent. Had not been. The cross-examination inquiry officer denied that the appellant did not admit to missing the device and that the respondent admitted that he had been provided with some tools which he had not been asked to return and that he had been sent to the labor court. Prior to the inquiry, the respondent was willing to make a similar statement. The worker alleges that he misused some of the tools that are respected. The overturned Anwar charge was also investigated in the absence of the defendant. Such an investigation cannot be considered fair and reasonable. And on the basis of such an inquiry, the defendant's dismissal was not sustainable. The dismissal order was set aside. Every employee has a fundamental right to be charged. In a fair and impartial investigation
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
