PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQ

This is an appeal challenging the decision dated 27‑7‑1987 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.l. Lahore, whereby accepting the grievance petition of the respondent he was directed to be re‑instated in service with back benefits.

2. The respondent has also brought cross‑objections which are being disposed of alongwith the appeal.

3. The facts are that the resignation of the respondent was accepted. The case of the respondent was that since he had brought a case for damages in the Civil Court against Mr. Khalid Majeed Butt, Works Manager, therefore, he was pressurized to withdraw that case and when he refused, he was threatened to be involved falsely in a theft case with the help of P.R.T.C. Magistrate and under the said threat his signatures were received on a resignation. The learned lower Court has disbelieved the evidence produced by the respondent on the point that under threat' of involvement in a theft case his signatures were received on the resignation and accepted the grievance petition of the respondent on the sole ground that the resignation stood withdrawn on the receipt of grievance notice by the appellant. I have gone through the grievance notice but have not been able to find any prayer for the withdrawal of the resignation. The question of allowing the respondent to withdraw the resignation could arise only if any such request had been made in this respect. In the grievance notice the stand taken by the respondent is the same that under duress his signatures were received on the resignation. When there was no request for withdrawal of resignation by the respondent, no question of withdrawal of it arises, The resignation was received by the employer by registered post. This being so, no question of exercising any duress arises. The bare statement of the respondent that his signatures were received under threat was not sufficient. The discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses were material and the learned lower Court rightly came to the conclusion that the witnesses were not present and had not given correct evidence. In these circumstances, the learned lower Court was not justified in accepting the grievance petition of the respondent.

4. As a result, the appeal is accepted and dismissing the cross‑objections, the grievance petition of the respondent is dismissed.

A.E.481/LB.P Appeal accepted.