ABDUL GHAFOOR vs Tie ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION — 1970 PLC 151

Citation: 1970 PLC 151

Court: Industrial Appellate Tribunal

Year: 1969

Decision Date: 1969-07-09

Parties: ABDUL GHAFOOR vs Tie ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, LAHORE AND ANOTHER

Headnotes

Result: order dismissed Judgment ORDER This is an appeal against the decision of the learned Chairman of the West Pakistan Industrial Court (Central Zone), Lahore, dated 31st March 1969, on an application under section 31 of the Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1959 (hereinafter called the repealed Ordinance). The learned Court by the impugned order dismissed the application on two grounds namely, that the appellant having admitted his guilt, it was no necessary for the Department to prove the charge and that them was inordinate delay in filing the application under section 3 of the repealed Ordinance.

Judgment Text

Court Name: Industrial Appellate Tribunal Judge(s): Inamullah Khan Title:ABDUL GHAFOOR vs Tie ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, LAHORE AND ANOTHER Case No.: Date of Judgment:1969-07-09 Reported As: 1970 PLC 151 Result: order dismissed Judgment ORDER This is an appeal against the decision of the learned Chairman of the West Pakistan Industrial Court (Central Zone), Lahore, dated 31st March 1969, on an application under section 31 of the Industrial Disputes Ordinance, 1959 (hereinafter called the repealed Ordinance). The learned Court by the impugned order dismissed the application on two grounds namely, that the appellant having admitted his guilt, it was no necessary for the Department to prove the charge and that them was inordinate delay in filing the application under section 3 of the repealed Ordinance. The revision of the appellant was dismissed .by the Department on 29th August 1966, and he filed the application under section 31, of the repealed Ordinance on 14th February 1968. There was thus a delay of about 18 months. 2. The first question that requires consideration is as to whether the appellant admitted his guilt. It is necessary to mention as to what eras the charge against the appellant. The charge-sheet reads as under :- "Works Manager of this service has reported that on 20-2-66, in night shift one end plate of Dynamo was given to you for a repair with clear instructions that you should repair it by adding separate supporting plates instead of getting it welded.…

Read the full judgment on Al Wakeelo — Pakistan's AI-powered legal research platform.