Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: CHAIRMAN, MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE; TOBA TEK SINGH VS Respondent: YOUNAS MASIH
1988 P L C 547
1988 P L C 547
[Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab]
Present: Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal
CHAIRMAN, MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE; TOBA TEK SINGH
Versus
YOUNAS MASIH
Appeal No.FD‑611 of 1986, decided on 5th May, 1986.
(a) West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Stand Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968)‑‑ ‑‑‑S.1(4) & S.0.15(4)‑‑Industrial dispute‑‑Removal from service account of conviction‑‑Employee of Municipal Committee not shown be governed by any statutory rules‑‑Provisions of West Pakis Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968, _held, applicable hence charge-sheeting and holding of enquiry would be necessary.
(b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑ ‑‑‑Ss.25‑A & 36‑‑Practice and procedure‑‑Ex parte decision‑-Grievance petition of employee of Municipal Committee against order of removal from service‑‑Chairman, Municipal Committee impleaded as employer Official of Municipal Committee authorised by Chief Officer to appear on behalf of Municipal Committee‑‑No duly authorised person, held appeared hence Labour Court was justified in passing ex parte decision.
Mian Muhammad Farooq for Appellant.
Muhammad Ashraf for Respondent.
Date of hearing‑ 27th April, 1986.
JUDGMENT
The ex parte decision dated 30‑10‑1985 has been challenge whereby the grievance petition of the respondent for as reinstatement in service has been accepted without back benefits.
2. The respondent was convicted and sentenced to two year R.I. for raking liquor. The punishment on appeal was reduced one year. The appellant on account of the respondent's convict removed him from service without issuing any charge‑sheet and holding enquiry. It has been argued that according to Efficiency and Discipline Rules of the appellant an employee who has been convicted a sentenced by a competent Court, can be removed from service without holding inquiry. It has not been shown that the appellant has its own statutory rules of service. So Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968 applies, according to Standing Order 15(4) of which, charge‑sheeting and holding of inquiry are necessary. '
3. It has been further argued that there was no justification in passing ex parte decision when the Sanitary Inspector was present with a letter of authority. Chairman was the party before the learned Lower Court, whereas the letter of authority had been issued in favour of the Sanitary Inspector by the Chief Officer. As no duly authorised person appear and requested for setting aside the ex parte proceedings, the learned lower Court was justified in passing ex parte decision.
4. As a result the appeal fails and is dismissed.
A.E./ 102/Lb.P???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.