| Case ID |
39b9d5ab-a16d-4c94-926e-03c3a9410128 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
217 of 1986 |
| Decision Date |
May 25, 1987 |
| Hearing Date |
May 25, 1987 |
| Decision |
The Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh, presided by A., J. Bachani, has ruled in favor of the petitioner, Rab Nawaz, thereby allowing his application for redress against the Rice Export Corporation of Pakistan Ltd. The decision, dated May 25, 1987, emphasized that the two-hour absence by Mr. Nawaz did not constitute misconduct warranting dismissal but was instead subject to a reprimand. Additionally, the tribunal found insufficient evidence to uphold the charges of assault against Mr. Nawaz, citing the lack of reliable witnesses and corroborative medical evidence. Consequently, Mr. Nawaz was reinstated to his position with a formal censure recorded in his file. The tribunal also ordered that back benefits accrued before the litigation period be granted to Mr. Nawaz, while denying benefits during the litigation due to the confirmed charge. Both parties were instructed to endeavor to conclude the litigation amicably within 15 days. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Rab Nawaz vs. Rice Export Corporation of Pakistan Ltd., adjudicated by the Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh on May 25, 1987, the tribunal meticulously examined allegations of misconduct against Mr. Nawaz, a security officer employed by the respondent. The case centered around two primary charges: unauthorized absence for two hours on May 20, 1978, and an alleged physical assault on Mr. Fazal Hussain on May 21, 1978. Mr. Nawaz contested his dismissal, asserting that the absence was authorized and the assault claim was fabricated as victimization by the management.
The tribunal delved into the nuances of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, XXIII of 1969, particularly Section 25-A(5), which outlines the scope of grievance petitions. The court evaluated whether the Labour Court had the jurisdiction to reassess the findings of the Enquiry Officer, ultimately affirming its authority to re-examine evidence and establish its conclusions independently. In assessing the charge of unauthorized absence, the tribunal referenced the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, VI of 1968, specifically Section O.15(2) & (3), determining that a two-hour absence, while a breach of duty, did not escalate to misconduct deserving of dismissal but warranted a formal reprimand.
The assault allegation posed significant challenges due to conflicting testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence. Mr. Hussain reported a physical altercation and abuse, claims which Mr. Nawaz vehemently denied, stating that no such incident occurred and that any apology tendered was coerced without his consent. The absence of medical evaluations and eyewitness accounts further weakened the prosecution's stance. Evidence presented by both parties was meticulously scrutinized, revealing inconsistencies and highlighting procedural oversights during the initial enquiry.
Notably, the tribunal emphasized the inadmissibility of admissions or confessions obtained under police custody without proper legal safeguards, as stipulated by the Payment of Wages Act. This highlighted the necessity for fair and impartial enquiry processes, reinforcing the protection of workers' rights against arbitrary dismissals and victimization. The tribunal's decision underscored the importance of adhering to due process and the legal frameworks governing industrial disputes.
Furthermore, the court addressed the procedural criticisms raised by Mr. Nawaz regarding the impartiality of the Enquiry Officer and the conduct of the enquiry. The tribunal dismissed these claims, affirming the Enquiry Officer's role and decisions as fair and within the bounds of legal propriety. The decision also touched upon the implications of habitual breaches of duty, delineating the boundary between minor infractions and serious misconduct warranting severe penalties.
In conclusion, the Labour Appellate Tribunal's ruling was a significant reaffirmation of workers' rights and the essential need for just and equitable treatment within industrial environments. By reinstating Mr. Nawaz and issuing a formal reprimand, the tribunal balanced the scales between organizational discipline and individual rights, setting a precedent for future cases involving similar disputes. This verdict not only provided relief to the petitioner but also reinforced the integrity of the Labour Courts in safeguarding fair labor practices and ensuring that dismissals are grounded in substantiated and lawful justifications. The case stands as a testament to the judicial system's role in mediating labor relations and upholding the principles of justice and equity within the workplace. |
| Court |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
|
| Entities Involved |
Rice Export Corporation of Pakistan Ltd.,
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
|
| Judges |
A., J. BACHANI
|
| Lawyers |
Mahmood Mubassir,
Javed Khalid
|
| Petitioners |
RAB NAWAZ
|
| Respondents |
RICE EXPORT CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN LTD.
|
| Citations |
1988 SLD 895,
1988 PLC 154
|
| Other Citations |
1973 PLC 9281,
1978 SC 239,
1970 L L C 275,
1972 L L C 302,
1964 LLC 29,
1978 PLC 173,
1974 LLC 94,
1974 PLC 36,
1973 PLC 281
|
| Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance, XXIII of 1969,
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, VI of 1968,
Payment of Wages Act
|
| Sections |
25-A(5),
S.O. 15(2) & (3)
|