Case ID |
4642bd75-2fb8-4538-b99b-685fcf403f8f |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
LHR-559 of 1986 |
Decision Date |
Dec 09, 1986 |
Hearing Date |
Dec 18, 1986 |
Decision |
The appeal was accepted, and the decision of the lower court was set aside. The appellant was entitled to unpaid wages and annual increments for the period of suspension as there was no rule in WAPDA (Efficiency and Discipline) that stated an employee is not entitled to wages unless acquitted honorably. The court emphasized the absence of a charge-sheet or inquiry against the appellant, highlighting that the suspension period should be treated as leave due, and the annual increments should not be denied. |
Summary |
This case revolves around the rights of a WAPDA employee who was suspended due to allegations of corruption. The employee was acquitted but faced denial of wages and increments during suspension. The Labour Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the employee, emphasizing that the lack of a formal charge-sheet or inquiry meant the suspension period should be compensated. The case highlights important aspects of employment law, particularly regarding the rights of suspended employees and the interpretations of acquittal in relation to their employment status. The decision reinforces the principle that employees must be treated fairly, and their rights upheld, particularly when no formal proceedings were initiated against them. This case could serve as a landmark in establishing precedents regarding employee rights in similar situations, making it significant in the realm of labor law. |
Court |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
|
Entities Involved |
WAPDA
|
Judges |
Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi,
S. M. Saleem
|
Lawyers |
Mian Mahmood Hussain,
Qamar ud Din
|
Petitioners |
WAPDA Employee
|
Respondents |
Managing Director (Power), WAPDA
|
Citations |
1988 SLD 956,
1988 PLC 255
|
Other Citations |
Not available
|
Laws Involved |
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)
|
Sections |
25-A
|